Representative Mike Moon (r) received a letter (all correspondence was forwarded to us by the original letter writer) about the Planned Parenthood hearings in Missouri which were run by the republican majority in the General Assembly. Similar hearings and “investigations” were promoted across across the country, precipitated by edited video circulated by anti-choice activists.

Oct 15, 2015

State Representative Michael Moon
State Capitol, Room 203-B
201 West Capitol Avenue
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Dear State Representative Moon,

Planned Parenthood has been “under investigation” in both the House and Senate for months and it’s time to move on.

Planned Parenthood affiliates in Missouri follow all laws and have the highest medical and ethical standards. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster recently released a 40 page report demonstrating that Planned Parenthood complies with all laws and that fetal tissue is properly handled according to Missouri law.

Missouri’s interim committees were formed in response to false allegations made in a series of deceptively edited, widely discredited videos. The Attorney General report settles this issue and there is no reason for the committees to continue except to further what has been called a “witch hunt,” and pursue the agenda of ending access to safe, legal abortion in the state.

I’m tired of seeing my tax dollars being wasted on this non-issue when you could be investing your time and our money into tackling issues that will foster better lives for more Missourians, like comprehensive sex education or by increasing access to affordable health care by expanding Medicaid.

I’m proud to stand with Planned Parenthood and the women and men who rely on them every single day, and I hope that you will see this and move on.

Sincerely,

Ms. Mary Mosley
[….]

Planned Parenthood had provided a link, with a template, for its supporters to contact the General Assembly committee via e-mail. Supporters could (and some did) write additional comments on the template message. Ms. Mosley received the following response from Representative Moon (r):

Mary,

Thank you for contacting me. I noticed the message you sent was a form letter of sorts. You may not even be aware that a letter was sent on your behalf (if this is the case, I understand). If you did, intentionally, send to me a form letter, please understand that I would have taken a personal, heart-felt letter, in your own words much more seriously.

In either case, since your letter was a form letter, maybe even a copied-and-pasted one, I will formulate a response and send the same to you and the others from whom I received an identical message.

You are correct that since the videos of Planned Parenthood’s alleged involvement in the selling of unborn baby parts an investigation in the Missouri House and Senate has taken place.

Following the report released by MO Attorney General Chris Koster, it has been found that the pathology lab Planned Parenthood used to examine the remains of the unborn babies was, on at least three occasions dissolved as a Missouri business. In fact, on September 21, 2015, during the AG’s investigation, the most recent letter from the MO Secretary of State to Pathology Services, 2916 S. Brentwood Blvd, Brentwood, MO 63144, notifying the lab of its dissolution was sent. Even if this is the only oversight in the AG’s report, they (the lab and Planned Parenthood) were operating outside of the law with regard to the proper handling of the bodies.

“Your” letter mentioned you tire of your tax dollars being wasted on this non-issue when the money could be invested into tackling issues that will foster better lives for more Missourians, like more affordable healthcare. I, too, am tired of my tax dollars being used to prop up business, like Planned Parenthood. As for affordable healthcare, the Affordable Care Act promised to provide it to those who need it most. Your attention, perhaps, should be directed to President Obama.

The committees invited representatives from Planned Parenthood to testify and, perhaps, set the record straight, yet no Missouri Planned Parenthood representative dared to be questioned. Why, if they had nothing to hide and could have presented their side of the story, would they “waste” your tax money and not show up to the hearing?

In addition, Gail Vasterling, former Director of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services testified about one month ago, would not provide any substantive answers. We recently learned that she has left the department for another state funded job. What does she have to hide? Would you not expect a state employee, entrusted with the care of thousands of our fellow citizens to be transparent in answering questions about the job she and her staff are hired to perform? This behavior is what we all should be in concerned about. This is truly a waste of our money. For a state employee, entrusted with such a great responsibility, to be allowed to simply resign one appointment and assume another should not be tolerated. I will urge the House budget Chair and Vice-chair to seriously consider striking from the budget the salary for Gail Vasterling.

One point “your” letter did not address is a key issue in the current debate: that of women’s health. I’ve listed a few of the potential risks of an abortion here:

– abdominal pain;
– nausea;
– vomiting;
– diarrhea;
– spotting (bleeding);
– infection (sepsis);
– scarring of the uterus;
– uterine perforation;
– organ damage;
– depression (leading to suicide);
– death.

I find it ironic that we caution women against drinking copious amounts of alcohol and smoking because of the potential detrimental effects on the unborn baby, yet we find it acceptable to suck a baby out of the womb or inject the womb with a saline solution in order to kill the baby.

Have you any understanding of the history of Planned Parenthood? Its founder, Margaret Sanger was a known eugenicist (one who follows the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics). Eugenics lost its popularity following the demise of Adolf Hitler.

The following are excerpts from Sanger:

“It seems to me from my experience…that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table which means their ignorance, superstitions and doubts. We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal.

We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

Dr. Alveda King, niece of the late Dr. Martin Luther King stated, “The most obvious practitioner of racism in the United States today is Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by the eugenicist Margaret Sanger and recently documented as ready to accept money to eliminate black babies.”

Planned Parenthood recently decided to no longer seek re-imbursement for providing baby parts to researchers. If, in fact, there was no wrongdoing, why the sudden reversal?

I encourage you to contact your own representative and begin a conversation about this important topic. As for me, though, I have settled in my mind that all lives matter, including women and the unborn babies they nurture.

Mike

“…a form letter of sorts…”

Uh, you think this response didn’t have pre-canned elements? Just asking.

We don’t think Representative Moon (r) understands the concept of Godwin’s Law.

The original letter writer has sent a somewhat diplomatic response:

The Honorable Michael Moon
State Capitol, Room 203B
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101

Dear Representative Moon:

I am in receipt of your electronic communication of October 17, 2015. Thank you for taking the time to respond at such length to my e-mail concerning the House committee hearings on Planned Parenthood. Since you indicated that you “would have taken a personal, heart-felt letter, in [my] own words much more seriously,” I am writing you one forthwith.

In spite of my gratitude for your lengthy missive with its ample disquisition on eugenics, one thing about it disturbed me, namely its incredibly sarcastic and condescending tone. In my fifty years of corresponding with elected officials, this is the single most insulting response I have ever received, even when my disagreement with the ideas of my correspondent had been expressed in much stronger language. Could it have been your way of figuratively “mooning” me? Or perhaps your legislative assistant or another employee wrote the communication on your behalf, perhaps without your knowledge or approval. You may not even be aware that a letter was sent on your behalf (if this is the case, I understand).

Be that as it may, your response clearly indicates a concern for those to whom you refer as “unborn babies.” It is also a clear indication of your regard for the already born.

Sincerely,
Dr. Mary A. Mosley

“…It is also a clear indication of your regard for the already born…”

Ten will get you twenty that he didn’t get that.

Previously:

HB 2256: It’s April, fools… (April 1, 2014)

The Missouri GOP, Evel Knievel and political stuntsmanship (April 24, 2014)

DLCC “Worst of the Worst” List – we already knew that (May 1, 2014)

HB 216: Agenda 21! (December 15, 2014)

HR 99: Because words mean nothing? (February 10, 2015)

Mike Moon: The sexism is expected; the cruelty is is the problem (February 10, 2015)

HB 1108: For what purpose? (March 5, 2015)

HCR 54: derp, derp, derp, derp… (March 13, 2015)

That’s quite a legacy of lunatic fringe legislation…

This is the forty-fourth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

Everybody is getting into the act now that other media are actually covering this story. And by everybody we mean those ubiquitous commenters on-line (with some really interesting repetitious themes) and in letters to the editor. In today’s Warrensburg Daily Star Journal there were two letters to the editor. One, titled “UCM donor will be missed” and another, titled “Donor will not be missed” [with a broken link]. Let’s take a look at the second letter, from the dead trees edition of the paper:

I read the Jan. 28 Muleskinner articles regarding Benoit Wesly being disturbed over the alleged, anti-Semitic comment.

I must say that I feel that this is much ado about nothing….I do not see any reference to anti-Semitism in the comment.

Possibly Mr. Wesly is not privy to the first amendment, contained within the bill of rights, regarding freedom of speech. Or possibly he feels that his donations to UCM give him the authority to usurp this amendment….

….The proper way to withdraw his support would be to do it quietly, not with the fanfare he has generated….

….Our friends at Missouri Valley College need to be watching this closely. Mr. Wesly could decide to try and place pressure on them if they do something which would cause them to fall from his favor….

Uh, Missouri Valley College is a private institution. It is not governed by this article in the Missouri Constitution:

Missouri Constitution

Article IX

EDUCATION

Section 8

Prohibition of public aid for religious purposes and institutions.

Section 8. Neither the general assembly, nor any county, city, town, township, school district or other municipal corporation, shall ever make an appropriation or pay from any public fund whatever, anything in aid of any religious creed, church or sectarian purpose, or to help to support or sustain any private or public school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other institution of learning controlled by any religious creed, church or sectarian denomination whatever; nor shall any grant or donation of personal property or real estate ever be made by the state, or any county, city, town, or other municipal corporation, for any religious creed, church, or sectarian purpose whatever.

Greg Hassler, with a continued, and very public, association with the University of Central Missouri, stated on the air:

Greg Hassler: …The University of Central Missouri. End of an era.

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

Greg Hassler: Aaron Podolefsky. Out. We’ve talked about it for a long time….

….The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally was, for years there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?

Marion Woods: Yep.

Greg Hassler: Drive by. He stopped that. I mean I think every religion should be able to celebrate, uh, in their own way, but, I mean we do live in Warrensburg, Missouri. This is America. You know. Let’s bring that back. How ’bout that?

Marion Woods: Wasn’t that the Christmas tree at the quadrangle?

Greg Hassler: No, there was also one at Selmo Park.

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

Gregg Hassler: In the, in the yard, area there, so. I mean, I don’t know, it’s jus… It, it was a bad fit from the get go. It’s, it’s over…

[emphasis added]

So, the thing that got Greg Hassler, an individual with a clear association with the University, “started” with his upset was that the president of the University of Central Missouri, who is Jewish, did not decorate a tree on state property for sectarian purposes, which would have violated the establishment clause, and which was actually cut down five years before he got here. Greg Hassler injected religion into this. Those are his words. According to our letter writer, it’s no big deal?

….The proper way to withdraw his support would be to do it quietly, not with the fanfare he has generated….

What, Greg Hassler can say what he did (yes, he can) and how dare Benoit Wesly say anything about it in public? Only Greg Hassler can say what he wants in public? No one else?

If our letter writer had been paying attention he would have known that Benoit Wesly made inquiries about the situation months ago, originally out of the public eye (If it weren’t for that pesky Missouri Sunshine Law we wouldn’t know that part). The Board of Governors didn’t address the situation.

So, the simple question for our letter writer, who appears to be outraged by Benoit Wesly’s reaction, do you think what Greg Hassler said was accurate and appropriate? Just asking.

It’s so inconvenient when anyone shines light on any unpleasantness. Instead, we should all clap louder.

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)