Susan G. Komen & Planned Parenthood?

07 Feb 2012 16:35 #41 by PrintSmith
Gee, I was unaware that a single woman drafted and implemented the policy for the entire organization outside of any call to do so and without any portion of it being reviewed and approved prior to being acted upon. Care to support that allegation with a pesky little thing called facts?

According to what has thus far been supplied, it was not the decision of a single woman on a crusade, it was the decision of the board at Komen after a thorough discussion of the policy, a policy which was put into place before this one woman crusade was hired as a VP. It is clear that this particular action under the policy was brought to the attention of, and approved by, the CEO and others and that the controversy of being associated with Planned Parenthood predated her being hired as a VP.

How the left comes up with the propaganda of a one woman crusade, propaganda contrary to any semblance of reason, is quite beyond me.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

07 Feb 2012 16:42 #42 by LadyJazzer
You have already been provided with "facts", (on Page-2 of this thread).

"Karen Handel was the prime instigator of this effort, and she herself personally came up with investigation criteria," the source, who requested anonymity for professional reasons, told HuffPost. "She said, 'If we just say it's about investigations, we can defund Planned Parenthood and no one can blame us for being political.'"

Emails between Komen leadership on the day the Planned Parenthood decision was announced, which were reviewed by HuffPost under the condition they not be published, confirm the source's description of Handel's sole "authority" in crafting and implementing the Planned Parenthood policy.


The FACT that you choose to eat the covers rather than read the contents, and then continue your howling about wanting "facts", is not our problem.

She did it. She resigned. She's gone. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

07 Feb 2012 16:55 #43 by homeagain
AND I believe N.O.W. was calling for resignation around Feb. 2nd.........LOTS of pressure for this to occur. The name of the game
at present is observation......let's see what ELSE surfaces to the top.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

07 Feb 2012 17:36 #44 by Soulshiner
Love it. PS calls for "facts" in one thread and will not provide any in another...

When you plant ice you're going to harvest wind. - Robert Hunter

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

07 Feb 2012 17:40 #45 by PrintSmith
Did, or did not, Cameron apply to become a naturalized citizen and must one be, or may one not be, a legal permanent resident before being allowed to apply to become a naturalized citizen? The facts are he did and one must be, right?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

07 Feb 2012 20:52 #46 by Soulshiner
It's funny how you can't provide any proof (facts), just conjecture.

I laugh more and more with every new post you make.

You know, just because you say something is a fact doesn't make it one.

When you plant ice you're going to harvest wind. - Robert Hunter

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

07 Feb 2012 21:53 #47 by FredHayek
I think there is more to this story than we are seeing here. It will be interesting to see how it plays out this month.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

08 Feb 2012 12:14 #48 by PrintSmith

Soulshiner wrote: It's funny how you can't provide any proof (facts), just conjecture.

Ocham's Razor Soulshiner. Now, applying reason and logic, as opposed to ignoring it, may seem to be mere "conjecture" to those of a "progressive" mindset, but that does not mean that such is actually the case. The facts of the matter are that one must be a legal permanent resident to apply to become a naturalized citizen in this union and Cameron applied to become a naturalized citizen. Them's the facts Soulshiner, there's no denying the existence of them. You may choose to either work with the facts or ignore them, but that won't change the existence of those facts.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

08 Feb 2012 12:17 #49 by Pony Soldier

PrintSmith wrote: Tainted by what, the left's intolerance for any opinion other than it's own?


Tainted by the fact that they are now known to contribute to Planned Parenthood and by the fact that they bowed to external pressure to spend that money in a way that they didn't want to. I, for one, will never give money to them knowing that it might go to Planned Parenthood.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

08 Feb 2012 16:20 #50 by Photo-fish
Wouldn't be nice if Planned parenthood disclosed how the annual grant of $700,000 gets used? (I still think 700K is a small amount after it is spread out over P.P.'s nationwide network.) Komen seems to know....

Komen admits" When a mammogram is indicated, a patient is often referred to a local program, such as the state’s breast and cervical cancer program. In other cases, the Komen Affiliate’s grant to Planned Parenthood may include funds to pay for mammograms outright. When this happens, a local provider performs the mammogram, and is then reimbursed by Planned Parenthood using the Komen grant funds.”

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/02/02/why-did-komen-stop-planned-parenthood-doesnt-do-mammograms/

Sounds to me like Planned Parenthood was using Komen grant money to fund mammograms after all. Now Komen will stop funding P.P. as a pass-through/middleman entity and just funnel the money right to the clinic that provides the Mammogram.

´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`´¯`•...¸><((((º>´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•.´¯`•...¸><((((º>

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.179 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+