Forum Post: SGK restores PP contributions !!
Posted 12 years ago on Feb. 3, 2012, 11:16 a.m. EST by bensdad
(8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
WE WON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It must be my final tweet that pushed them over the edge!
haha
waitaminute, this is a private charity speedily "caving in" and "bowing to politics," this time the pressure of PPFA and its minions (i.e., Mayor Billionberg) and the mainstream media. Isn't this exactly what posters to this forum decried and moaned about a few days ago?
http://www.americablog.com/2012/02/komen-caves-kinda-but-still-refuses-to.html
The Susan G. Komen foundation caved today. Kinda. They issued a statement apologizing for the mess they created this week when they cut funding for Planned Parenthood breast exams for poor women, seemingly under pressure from far right politicos and anti-choice groups. But Komen's apology is slightly lacking. And according to their own CEO last night, they still can't approve future grants from Planned Parenthood. Unless she was lying.
In the apology Komen says that they'll continue Planned Parenthood's current funding, and they're changing their "no investigations" rule to say that it must be a criminal investigation, and conclusive. Okay, but the current funding wasn't at issue. Komen had always said they'd continue the current funding, so that's a red herring. The issue is next year's funding, which Komen just turned down. And on that account, Komen now says this: We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.
YES. Power of the people much?
yep, Bloomberg-type people.
Erm, nope, not at all. Your logic is flawed. Just because Bloomberg donated to PP it doesn't mean that all who donated follow Bloomberg. He did it for clear political reasons. That's up to him. But it doesn't follow that those who donated are like Bloomberg--that's fallacious reasoning.
no, it's precisely Bloomberg type people who most support PPFA and put the most pressure on SKG - rich, white, powerful, liberal elites with strong media industry ties.
Anyhow, goobs, you're hardly in a position to draw conclusions about the outcome here. You're obviously a fanatical PP supporter, given your mania and "outrage" on display here over a private charity's decisionmaking.
"no, it's precisely Bloomberg type people who most support PPFA and put the most pressure on SKG - rich, white, powerful, liberal elites with strong media industry ties."
Um, you have proof? Data? Or just the usual aspersions? Here's some data: People outraged over SGK donated $3,000,000 to Planned Parenthood. $250,000 of that came from matching donation from Bloomberg--who, btw, is FAR from a liberal. He's a republican. He's against OWS. He's very PRO Wall Street. These are well known facts--and are not in dispute. But your attempt to conflate his support of PP with Bloomberg is exactly the kind of tactic that will keep whatever argument you have marginalized.
As for my fanatical support for a private charity's decision making, well, that decision making was driven, clearly, by the witch hunt undertaken by Rep. Stearns of Florida. The data and proof are out there--as I've posted repeatedly. You probably haven't read it, because it's a lot easier to call people names rather than debate on the merits and data.
Get a grip, groobs. Bloomberg may qualify as conservative in the minds of some in liberal Whitelandia (i.e. Vermont), but most thinking people recognize him for what he is - a dictatorial, liberal, nanny-state, secular zealot. (not to mention ardently, intractably, fanatically pro-abortion)
PPFA is a goliath supported by a rich liberal white media intelligentsia. You can't deny the facts.
LOL.
Making statements and pronouncements does not equal "facts." Cite your sources when you make statements.
PPFA actually receives a lot of funds from a lot of different sources--as does Komen.
Your point about Bloomberg--a billionaire at electoral risk (probably why he timed his donation the way he did--doesn't square with his lifestyle or chosen political party. He's not a democrat--he's a republican.
Man, here's how your logic works:
Obama on a sunny day: "Man, it's a glorious, sunny day today."
FOX: "Obama Expresses Hatred for Clouds in the Sky."
LOL. But hey, keep trying. It's fun!
[Removed]
PP is a political organization it has tons of lobbyist, just like the other side. Don't kid yourself that it is grassroots.
EXACTLY how is PP political?
Lobbying for women's health does not make them "political"
Who ever said they were grassroots?
[Removed]
What do you mean "we", dude? one might conclude from your claim "we won" that the "grassroots" accomplished something here.
I am a member of OWS and numerous working groups,
but I consider myself - my first allegiance to sanity.
We sane people won.
I hope you are part of the the sane "we"
Sane? you're off the rails. First you claim no one's ever said PP is grassroots, now you insist "we" won. I ain't "we" and this wasn't a grassroots win. It was a white-liberal-corporate-media-elitist win
Typical Rs liar
your post :
"First you claim no one's ever said PP is grassroots"
my post
"Who ever said they were grassroots?"
This is EXACTLY the way the foxes and the Rs twist the truth
to delude the lemmings
I asked a question
you twisted my question into a declaration.
.....................................................................................Rs
Brinker's press release is, well, gross:
We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women's lives.
The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen. We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not.
Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation. We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair. Our only goal for our granting process is to support women and families in the fight against breast cancer. Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process. We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.
It is our hope and we believe it is time for everyone involved to pause, slow down and reflect on how grants can most effectively and directly be administered without controversies that hurt the cause of women. We urge everyone who has participated in this conversation across the country over the last few days to help us move past this issue. We do not want our mission marred or affected by politics - anyone's politics.
Starting this afternoon, we will have calls with our network and key supporters to refocus our attention on our mission and get back to doing our work. We ask for the public's understanding and patience as we gather our Komen affiliates from around the country to determine how to move forward in the best interests of the women and people we serve. We extend our deepest thanks for the outpouring of support we have received from so many in the past few days and we sincerely hope that these changes will be welcomed by those who have expressed their concern.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/03/susan-g-komen-planned-parenthood_n_1252651.html
What about the misleading statements? Yeah. They still suck. She kept going on the other day to Andrea Mitchell about how the response to their decision has been "very very favorable." Ugh.
What is it about republicans that they feel the need for opacity over transparency, lies over truth?
What is it about republicans that they feel the need for opacity over transparency, lies over truth?
I know this is a generalization - but IT IS GENERALLY TRUE
Democrats study, Democrats reason, Democrats debate, Democrats conclude
republiclans believe, republiclans obey, republiclans know
it is not a coincidence that unquestioning religious lemmings are the core of the religio/political insanity-
the abortion clinic bombings
the Irish "war"
Noah got the kangaroos back to Australia
the lynchings in the south ( James Byrd )
the Sunnis killing Shiites
evolution is not a fact
the witch burning in New England
the Earth is 6000 years old
the birthers
the Jew burning in Spain (1492)
the Shiites killing Sunnis
the sex violence by the pedophile priests
virtually all of these people are or would be republiclans - having lived their lives programmed as lemmings by a religion that has destroyed reason and trained them to
know the preached truth
Well, excellent points, all. I've always thought it'd be interesting to do an analysis of how many times the rightists use phrases like "I believe" and "It seems to me" etc. when it comes to explaining their positions on the major issues. This is especially true when it comes to the economy. No data, just "gut feelings." Dubya was a leader on the "in my gut" school of "analysis."
And I find that in the hundreds of interactions I've had with them on this site, the vast majority use ad hominem attacks, epithets, and faulty reasoning to make their case--most, but not all.
Take, for example, the reply to your post just now by "BonTon." Not only is the comment structure "tortured" ("most proudly stupid post" means, erm, what?) but it incorporates the usual ad hominem attack. Yep. That's about right...
groobs, very "torured" indeed!
ZING! Got me! Well done! Check and mate! LOL.
Derp.
yep, kind of ridiculous to criticize a post's "structure" when you can't spell.
"analysis" - I've been considering this for years
If you watch msnbc & fox ( you are schizo )
you will find msnbc centers on actual video of what a pol says
while fox "reports" what the pol says so they can spin it
also
if you watch any left-right debate - with the sound OFF
about abortion, home schooling, war - anything!
and one person seems to be smiling and giggling - thats the right guy
also
why can't the R's remember the name of the "other" political party?
is it their genetic hatred of any "other"
this is the most proudly stupid post I've yet seen on this forum. congrats!!
Public outcry/outrage can make a difference.
In follow-up support of that idea:
Petition from CREDOACTION to end Corporate person-hood.
http://act.credoaction.com/r/?r=745043&id=34439-4904244-%3DMldmHx&t=7
Link? I cannot find it.
I can't either - I just plugged this in to google:
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=komen+funding+restored&pbx=1&oq=komen+funding+restored&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=446190l451117l2l451382l22l20l0l2l2l1l255l2995l0.16.4l22l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=97418def9c3dce11&biw=1024&bih=605
Thanks for that.
Ah, thank you.
there is a CNN article that shows up in that search now - and it seems to indicate that funding has been restored - I find the whole funding process obscure enough that I can't tell if it really has been restored or if this is a feel good statement.
From what I have read, it has been restored. This is a good thing.
Yanno, when they were trying to shut down the local PP, the statement came out that there were other places for people to go. The reality is that there were no places that people could receive affordable health care. I remember at the time thinking that this was literally forcing people to pay for very expensive treatment because they knew that federal funding was not paying for abortions. I still think that this is partially true.
That seems to be what was on the news last nite - funding restored - but the statements and the process make it difficult to be sure.
You will get a kick out of this.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/02/1061064/-Komen-Foundation-official-deletes-evidence-of-anti-choice-biasfromTwitter
The credibility is gone forever. This isn't something that they can easily restore.
What were they ever thinking of, hiring a goddamned repelican . . .
Karen Handel should resign - or be fired.
I agree.
Excellent.