Kansas State Rep. Allan Rothlisberg: Women Over 50 Don’t Need Gynecological Services

Allan_Rothlisberg_Gynecological_Services

Making the social media rounds:

Want to leave Rep. Rothlisberg a polite message? You can contact him via Facebook, Twitter, or his state office phone/email.

[H/T UniteWomen.org]

UPDATE as of January 22, 2014 at 2:30 PM ET:

For those commenting that these comments are hearsay from people who weren’t present in the hearing, the source(s) we’re relying on – sources that rarely prove wrong – are Planned Parenthood and Haley Pollock (who is the Communications Director for the Kansas House Minority Leader). Pollock’s tweet about the hearing comment can be viewed here

We chose to post this picture/quote based on the fact that multiple sources have come forward to confirm the statements. Though one news source – quoting Rep. Rothlisberg denying the statements – has challenged those sources, that news source has not provided any proof that all of the people who’ve come forward are wrong. If and when video confirmation (that Rothlisberg did not make these statements) surfaces, we’ll be more than happy to issue a correction. Until then, it’s Rep. Rothlisberg’s lone word against multiple sources all saying the same thing.

UPDATE as of January 22, 2014 at 6:00 PM ET:

State Senator Anthony Hensley (the Minority Leader of the Kansas state Senate) has confirmed Rep. Rothlisberg’s remarks in a post to his Facebook page. In the post, he stated, “I am aware of Rep. Rothlisberg’s denial. Wouldn’t you deny saying something so ignorant? Unfortunately, no media were present at the time and the Republican-run Kansas legislature has made a practice of not releasing committee recordings – ironically spurred by other outrageous statements that have been an embarrassment to Republican leadership. The truth is that multiple sources who were in the committee room at the time of his comment have all attested to the accuracy of my post. Nonetheless, I stand by it.”

UPDATE as of January 23, 2014 at 7:00 PM ET:

A reader wrote in this evening with a correction on Rep. Rothlisberg’s district. The reader said, “Rothlisberg is from Grandview Plaza, not Junction City. His home is in Grandview Plaza, and the Junction City area is split between House Districts 65 and 68. At least half of Junction City is not even ‘served’ (using this term **very** loosely here) by Rothlisberg… and I suspect there is a good portion of residents in the District 65 portion of Junction City that did not even vote for the man.” His legislative profile can be viewed here if you’d like additional information.
For virtually his entire life, Tim has been writing. Over the years he’s dabbled in mainstream fiction, science fiction, dystopian fiction, and personal essays. The one consistent thread through his entire writing career has been blogging – he’s been doing it since 1997 in one form or another. In addition to writing Tim has frequently worked and volunteered as a civil rights advocate including on campus LGBT advocacy as well as interning with the Colorado Civil Rights Division.
24 comments
flora68
flora68 5pts

QUESTION: Why would anyone shoot a "messanger"? Because it was coming right at them? Seriously, is "Messanger" your name or something?

Rob S
Rob S 5pts

Hey, tomaf how come ***ALWAYS*** is the only time you used the shift button?

tomaf
tomaf 5pts

don't bother trying to explain logic to repugs

tomaf
tomaf 5pts

because the repugnantcans ***ALWAYS*** prove every story they release with conclusive evidence, so the dems should ass well

tomaf
tomaf 5pts

because that's what repugnantcans always do right? wait till there's conclusive evidence??? multiple eye/ear witnesses is proof enough. i'm sure they can show u the short and the long form versions of their testimony.

tomaf
tomaf 5pts

so you are saying repugnantcans never say such dumass things???

tomaf
tomaf 5pts

it's based on living in the faux news bubble

Andrew
Andrew 5pts

UPDATE as of January 22, 2014 at 2:30 PM ET:For those commenting that these comments are hearsay from people who weren't present in the hearing, the source(s) we're relying on - sources that rarely prove wrong - are Planned Parenthood and Haley Pollock (who is the Communications Director for the Kansas House Minority Leader). Pollock's tweet about the hearing comment can be viewed here. We chose to post this picture/quote based on the fact that multiple sources have come forward to confirm the statements. Though one news source - quoting Rep. Rothlisberg denying the statements - has challenged those sources, that news source has not provided any proof that all of the people who've come forward are wrong. If and when video confirmation (that Rothlisberg did not make these statements) surfaces, we'll be more than happy to issue a correction. Until then, it's Rep. Rothlisberg's lone word against multiple sources all saying the same thi:State Senator Anthony Hensley (the Minority Leader of the Kansas state Senate) has confirmed Rep. Rothlisberg's remarks in a post to his Facebook page. In the post, he stated, "I am aware of Rep. Rothlisberg’s denial. Wouldn’t you deny saying something so ignorant? Unfortunately, no media were present at the time and the Republican-run Kansas legislature has made a practice of not releasing committee recordings - ironically spurred by other outrageous statements that have been an embarrassment to Republican leadership. The truth is that multiple sources who were in the committee room at the time of his comment have all attested to the accuracy of my post. Nonetheless, I stand by it."OK, So where??????????????????????????

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

Not to beat a dead horse, but perhaps you should actually read the full article.

Scott 2 Hottie
Scott 2 Hottie 5pts

Please tell me it's not planned parenthood and Haley Pollock>>>>>As neither attended the meeting. You have given no other names above. Maybe I am missing something. So if you could just reply the names to remove my confusion..

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

We've already previously updated our article above with two persons that were in attendance at the session (including confirming statements). I'd invite you to read the article in its entirety for the answer to your question.

scott 2 hottie
scott 2 hottie 5pts

Five WOW.......... How about you name just one... Anyone will do.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

While I suspect you're merely being smug and disingenuous, I'd love the contact information for your "sources" seeing as we've now contacted five different people who were in attendance at the committee meeting - including a sitting Kansas legislator - who witnessed these statements and have testified to their accuracy.

Scotty 2 Hottie
Scotty 2 Hottie 5pts

Tim I have confirmed with Multiple sources as well and unlike you I will give their names: Betty Ann Goth is a 90 year old widow who was dropping of some fresh bake pie. She said she "Never heard him say this" Dontavius Jackson ex football player and now a security officer claims he did not say this at all.Chad Rempel a cat burglar who was in the air ducts during this meeting also never heard the Rep. say these things.One lady from planned parenthood sending out a tweet that her boyfriends, sister, best friend, knows a guy how worked for a girl, who's mother was there doesn't mean it "Went to publication"

Alan S
Alan S 5pts

And your opinion is based on...???

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

How is it like having your cake & eating it too? Multiple eye witness sources confirmed the statement - it went to publication. That's how journalism works,We've obtained additional and more official confirmations after the fact in lieu of Rothlisberg's denial. That you disagree with multiple eye witness accounts doesn't make this blog any less credible or the fact that Rothlisberg made the statement any less true.Perhaps what you should be asking yourself is this: why is the Kansas GOP so reluctant to record and release what they discuss in committee?

FairTradePolitics
FairTradePolitics 5pts

Kind of like having your cake and eating it too? How about this: you wait until there's conclusive evidence that something actually happened, then publish it. It's called journalism. Check it out. What you print (even if it ends up true) belongs in rags.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

More than one source has attested that he did say this, which is why we've maintained this article without retraction. When solid evidence that those sources were incorrect surfaces, we'll be more than happy to issue a correction,

tbollea
tbollea 5pts

I'm not entirely sure, just as you're not entirely sure he said this. The quote comes from 2 sources, neither of whom were actually there. So, unlike you, I require actual evidence (at least from someone who was there) that shows he said this. Until then, it's just hearsay. The video is not available online yet.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

If you're entirely sure, please post the video the article you linked has not provided as proof yet.

Tim Peacock
Tim Peacock 5pts

If you're entirely sure, please post the video the article you linked has not provided as proof yet.