I haven't been proved wrong at all; in fact, you said that her message was "very clear," you just found the wording of it to be misleading.

You said yourself that her numbers are correct, but that you found her terminology imperfect.

So why is this letter still posted up here trying to say that she lied about the numbers? You yourself said that her numbers are correct.

I certainly don't take issue with asking people to be honest; but in this situation, the post here accuses the woman of posting false numbers, which you admitted that she didn't. So actually, I am asking you to be honest. If you have a problem with her wording, make the letter be about her wording. Don't make it be about the numbers, which are correct.

The reason I'm changing the subject is because I don't understand why you guys are spending your time doing this, and not rallying to actually give mothers the support they need. The #1 reason why people abort is that they can't afford babies. Why aren't you attacking this reason at its source, and trying to provide funding for women so they don't abort?? This would be a much more useful way to spend your time and funds. You guys have spend tens of thousands of dollars on your 'sting' operations on PP. Why not spend that money to rally for support for WIC? And why is everyone avoiding this issue of WIC every time I bring it up?

It's really fascinating that you bring up Buddhism, since Buddhism is not opposed to abortion.

I am a Buddhist myself, and the religion actually frowns on interfering with the woman's privacy in this way.

If Ms. Dupuy's intention was "very clear," I'm not sure how you can also say that she is "misleading" and "obfuscating" at the same time.........

Why doesn't Live Action do more to support low income mothers, such as post here about rallying support to fund WIC? This is a wonderful platform that has so much potential to help low income mothers. Why is the focus on tearing apart random journalists instead of what matters, which is improving and saving the lives of children?

NY Times is exactly right. "Total budget" includes assets and is $1.1 billion. "Operating budget" does not mean "total budget".

No one is trying to hide anything or lie about numbers, dude. Where are the other 90+ tax filings you say are out there, because legally PP has to publish form 990?

Speaking of money, it's totally reasonable for the military to be spending my tax dollars on nascar, eh?

No, the 990 is for the entire organization. That's how the 990 works. It's the form that shows the public the financials of the non-profit. Not each individual branch.

"Assets" and "operating budget" are two different things. You don't use up your entire assets in one year's operating budget. PP's operating budget is ~100 million. Their total assets are ~1,100 million.

It's not really that complicated and you guys are digging yourselves a pretty deep hole trying to call some random journalist a liar who is citing facts directly from PP's tax return.

I hope you are spending at least as much time lobbying to support WIC as you are calling random news articles fiction. That is a true pro-life stance.

This is not true. The IRS filing is for the entire PP. Show me the other 90? Oh wait you can't, because it's this one.

Yikes, you guys should really take down this letter.... It's definitely not helping your cause to have incorrect info on here. Looking at PP's IRS tax filings for 2008 obviously shows that Dupuy's numbers for the operating budget are correct.
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/PPFA...

YES! Arrest women if they have a miscarriage. FINALLY, justice.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110225...

Many women also get tampons from Planned Parenthood. It's really an essential service. Zero of your tax dollars are funding abortion. Zero!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sunshine, if we make abortion illegal and force women to become baby incubators, where do we draw the line? What's next - forcing everyone to donate their organs to save lives? Forcing everyone to donate blood? Forcing all women to be stay-at-home moms and not have careers because that's better for the child? I am just as opposed to abortion as you, but I don't think it should be the law that women can't have them. The law should not be used to regulate our bodies, and it's not used to regulate our bodies in any other area, with organs, life support, or anything. Would you like the law telling you when you're allowed to take your husband or child off life support and when you're not? The law does not belong inside my uterus.