None Dare Call It Murder

I’ve got just one quick note to add to the discussion of the Komen Foundation’s surrender to Greater Wingnuttia and the Global War on Women.

That would be that this decision is not just about the dollars.  It’s genuinely a matter of life and death  — of murder, really, with only the anonymity of the victims to obscure the the connection between act and consequence.*

Y’all may recall that I wrote along these lines about eight months ago in connection with Mitch Daniels’ decision to defund Planned Parenthood in Indiana.  (Yup, that Daniels — the hack our friends in literate Wingnutistan see as the great hope of the GOP).  Now we’re back again to run the numbers on what the removal of the services Planned Parenthood provides to women seeking preventative care for breast cancer will do.**

Here are the basic figures:  over the last five years, the Komen Foundation provided Planned Parenthood with sufficient support to pay for 170,000 breast exams and 6,700 referrals for mammography. The question of how frequent and how early a mammography program should be has, shall we say, been vigorously debated, but the issue gained some clarity last year with the publication of a large scale longitudinal study by Swedish researchers in which over 133,000 women were followed for a total of 29 years.

The results of this study provide low-end estimates for the lives saved by screening:  for every 414 or 519 women screened*** for seven years running, one breast cancer death would be prevented.  What’s more, the researchers emphasized that this is a conservative conclusion:

Evaluation of the full impact of screening, in particular estimates of absolute benefit and number needed to screen, requires follow-up times exceeding 20 years because the observed number of breast cancer deaths prevented increases with increasing time of follow-up.

I’m being deliberately dry in this telling, and I’m sure you can guess why:  I do not wish the conclusion to lose any of its force to misplaced snark.  The bald facts are grim enough.

How grim?  Take the most modest number from this study —519 women screened for each life saved.  That’s on the order of 13 women from the 6,700 screened with Komen Foundation money who get to live.****

Or:  that’s 13 women who will die for lack of those funds.

As I wrote about cervical cancer screening in Indiana:  we won’t know who those women are.  We will never know their names; who loved them; how many kids they will leave behind.  But if the total funds for screening in the system drop with the withdrawal of Komen Foundation support, they’ll be dead all the same.

Caveats, before I drop this “just the facts, Ma’am” tone:  this is a blunt, back of the envelope bit of arithmetic.  There are all kinds of factors that a real epidemiologist would consider before making any such bold claim.  Some of the obvious ones push the conclusion to a higher likely total of preventable deaths:  these women are being referred for screening, which suggests that someone had an inkling that they might be at risk.  Planned Parenthood sees a clientele that is likely to lack more health care services than the general population.  And there are the general points the original researchers made to suggest that the total of lives saved through screening would be greater than their baseline number.  There are probably factors that weigh in the other direction as well — one could imagine, for example, that the preliminary examinations turned up more aggressive cancers, which may have outcomes that mammographic detection does not much alter.  You get the point.  The reality of public health, medicine, and the basic biology of cancer is such that precise predictions are always wrong.

That said, the broader claim still stands:  there is a significant and growing body of evidence that regular mammographic breast cancer screening saves lives.  The converse follows:  withholding that screening means real people will suffer.

And here I’ll drop the pretense of dispassion.  The Komen Foundation’s decision links directly to illness, to death and loss and dreadful sorrow left behind.

Those losses can’t be called manslaughter either, not as I see it.  Preventable deaths that flow from lack of access to the standard of care are wholly predictable, even if the individual victims are not identifiable.  Those blocking access through want of funds know — or should — what will happen.  There’s nothing accidental about these outcomes.w

Which means that this isn’t just another salvo in the culture war.  This is nothing to be clever about in 850 word columns on the back pages of the Grey Lady.  This is not a bit of clever gamesmanship to rev up a base for whom just the name Planned Parenthood conjures up all their horrors of female agency.

This is real life, and real lives lost…and, once again, this is why this election matters so much.

*Yup.  Still working the refs for that Moore Award.

**Just to be clear:  for what follows, I’m assuming that these services are withdrawn, that the withholding of resources from the Komen Foundation doesn’t get made up somewhere else.

*** The spread is down to the details of data collection and analysis in the Swedish study.

****The weasel is about the difference in the five year span of screening Komen funds are said to cover, and the seven year screening sequence identified in the Swedish study.  I lack both the data and the skill to do more than waffle a bit here.

Image:  Artemisia Gentileschi, Jael and Sisera, 1620

244 replies
  1. 1
    balconesfault says:

    Calling it murder is a bit silly. By that standard, me choosing to spend $100 to take my wife to a UT football game instead of donating it to PP is also “murder”.

    Just call it stupid and counterproductive given the Komen Foundation’s goals (and feel free to call my 4 hours of gametime indulgence selfish).

  2. 2
    comrade scott's agenda of rage says:

    Wait for the first DFH allowed on the teevee call this murder and watch the nutters and their corporate media enablers go crazy.

  3. 3
    Yevgraf says:

    When it comes to being a Forced Birther, it is about the only way for the white conservative wingnut to pretend that he cares about someone.

    In every one of the great civil rights battles, the white wingnut has come down on the wrong side. Safer workplaces, ending slavery, ending systematic and economic oppression of racial and religious minorities, ending systematic discrimination against women in business, extending rights to gay folk, the conservative has screamed “STOP”. By claiming the moniker “pro-life” conservatives can pretend that they aren’t amoral, violent, soul-killing fuckstains while forcing other people to bear the price of their righteous penance.

  4. 4
    Veritas says:

    So how do liberals feel about sex-selective abortion? Is it cool to abort a girl if the mother really wants a boy instead?

  5. 5
    Raven says:

    @Veritas: Would have been cool to abort you, dickhead.

  6. 6
    Veritas says:

    @Raven:

    Balloon Juice: petulant and content-free.

  7. 7
    butler says:

    By that standard, me choosing to spend $100 to take my wife to a UT football game instead of donating it to PP is also “murder”.

    Except that people didn’t give you money/buy pink products with the specific purpose of fighting cancer.

  8. 8
    Barbara says:

    I’m not going to call it murder, because calling it what it is, craven, greedy and callous hypocrisy, is sufficient given Komen’s relentless effort to boast of its concern for women. Apparently that stops as soon as the concern threatens its pursuit of money.

    Really, Komen has so many well-documented instances of crossing the line in pursuit of money that this should not have seemed so surprising. But somehow, I am still shocked: I mean, for an organization whose sole purpose is assuring access to breast cancer screening and treatment, taking away one of the few screening options available to uninsured women is like announcing that its mission has fundamentally changed. That it gave such an idiotic and transparently false excuse just makes it that much worse.

    Don’t support Komen and its cloying pink ribbons. If you feel the need to publicly support breast cancer as a cause, there is always the Avon foundation and associated walks.

  9. 9
    Lee says:

    I realize that this is a bit of hyperbole but there is not much difference between what the Komen is doing and when the Saudi religious police made the girls burn to death so to not offend their religion and escape the fire uncovered.

  10. 10
    butler says:

    Is it cool to abort a girl if the mother really wants a boy instead?

    Better safe than sorry. That girl could grow up to be something other that a submissive, chaste, second-class citizen, and we just wouldn’t want to risk that, would we?

  11. 11
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    what the hell does that have to do with breast cancer screening, you half-wit?

  12. 12
    bemused says:

    @Veritas:

    My God, you are tiresome. Your middle school teachers must feel the same way.

  13. 13
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    I’m trying to see how far “progressives” will go to defend “choice”.

    So: sex-selective abortion, pro-choice or anti-choice? You do know a lot of Indian and Chinese couples come to the US for specifically that purpose, right? To abort girls? Because the United States has some of the most liberal and lax abortion laws in the entire world, even more so than western Europe.

    Interesting article on this issue:

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/a.....rtion_trap

    Yes, as it turns out, abortion is a whole lot more complicated than bumpersticker slogans memorized in your Womyn’s Studiez Classes.

  14. 14
    slag says:

    @Veritas: Is it “cool”? No. Is it absolutely her right and much better than any alternative currently scientifically available? Yes.

  15. 15
    Nethead Jay says:

    Please ignore the nonsense from the troll, he’s only here to derail the thread. Guess the subject of the post is really threatening…

  16. 16
    Veritas says:

    @slag:

    So it’s her absolute right to abort a girl because she wanted a boy? This is advancing the rights of women everywhere?

  17. 17
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    do you think women should be forced, by law, to carry and give birth to a child they don’t want to carry and birth?

    it’s a woman’s body, it’s her choice. what’s your answer? yes or no.

  18. 18
    Veritas says:

    @Nethead Jay:

    At least slag had the courage to come out and say he’s OK with gendercide because choice in abortion is absolute. You should have the balls to do the same.

  19. 19
    Tonal Crow says:

    @balconesfault: Well said. As reprehensible as Komen’s decision is, calling it “murder” rapes the language (irony intentional).

  20. 20
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    I’m for moving to having the same abortion laws as Germany:

    Availability: On request

    Gestational limit: 12 weeks

    Conditions: The woman must receive proper counselling three days before the procedure. The state-regulated counselling is required to inform the woman that the unborn have a right to life and to try to convince her to continue her pregnancy.

    The procedure is not covered by public health insurance except for women with low income. The law includes penalties for people who force a pregnant woman to obtain an abortion or who induce a pregnant woman to have an abortion by maliciously withholding support payments.

  21. 21
    Veritas says:

    Read all of Europe’s abortion laws here, it’s very interesting:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6235557.stm

    The Roe decision is extremely liberal by world standards.

  22. 22
    Soonergrunt says:

    @Veritas: Doesn’t bother me at all. Let them abort early, abort often, and abort selectively to their hearts’ content.
    You wouldn’t lift a finger to help any of those children have a decent life if you were given the opportunity to make the trade, so what do you care?

  23. 23
  24. 24
    chopper says:

    @Forced Birther:

    so you think after 12 weeks the government has a bigger claim to a woman’s womb than she does. go conservatism!

  25. 25
    PurpleGirl says:

    Gee, here I thought that the Chinese government encouraged abortion so as to keep the population from exploding and that Chinese citizens came to US so that they could have as many children as they could, regardless of the sex of the child. My, my… I learn something new every day here at Balloon Juice.

  26. 26
    Veritas says:

    @Soonergrunt:

    So a second liberal endorses gendercide. Cool.

    Tell me, how do you feel about China’s one child policy? Planned Parenthood has spoken out in favor of it (and it includes forced abortions).

  27. 27
    johio says:

    Does anyone know what has happened with the women in Indiana who previously relied on PP for health services? I seem to remember that Daniels said other options were in place and would be funded, but then he also said he wouldn’t be going after non-public unions, so he’s a proven liar.

  28. 28
    butler says:

    @Veritas: So now you want us to be more like Europe? Like with high taxes and universal healthcare and union protections and all that?

  29. 29
    slag says:

    @Veritas: America is right and you’re wrong.

  30. 30
    Seanly says:

    Why is “progressice” & “choice” in scare quotes?

    I may not like what people do with their freedom, but I am comfortable with them being able to make any decision they want.

    I will exercise my freedom of choice to not give Susan G Komen any donations. There are other breast cancer organizations out there.

  31. 31
    Veritas says:

    @butler:

    How do you feel about Germany’s abortion law?

    How about the Netherlands, with five-day waiting periods and mandatory ultrasound?

  32. 32
    Veritas says:

    @Seanly:

    Another vote for gendercide. Lots of Chinese and Indian men would agree with you!

    WOMYN’S RIGHTS NOW!

  33. 33
    Veritas says:

    Say we could determine sexual orientation in the womb, and my wife really doesn’t want to have a gay kid.

    It’s ok for her to abort? Right up to the third trimester?

  34. 34
    Lefty Lefty says:

    So how do liberals feel about sex-selective abortion? Is it cool to abort a girl if the mother really wants a boy instead?

    Speaking for all liberals, since we all think alike and sweeping generalizations are AWESOME, sex-selective abortion is also AWESOME, or as you put it, COOL. After all, we love abortions! Medical procedures wrought with emotion and the burden of half of America thinking you’re a murderer are GREAT. After the required walk of shame past the psychos who want to make my private decisions for me, the required 3D ultrasound, and the required listening to the heartbeat–we liberals still LOVE abortions! Sex-selective ones too!

    Jackass.

  35. 35
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Veritas: And this has to do with preventative care for breast cancer exactly how?

    That is: do not feed trolls. This one has achieved its desired end of derailing this thread.

  36. 36
    The Moar You Know says:

    @Veritas: Don’t care. Are you still trolling over at StarbucksGossip.com, using your old nick? Or have you found us a more entertaining target, you professional shit-stirrer?

  37. 37
    Veritas says:

    @Lefty Lefty:

    why should you care? It’s just a clump of cells or a blob of jelly right?

  38. 38
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    i don’t believe that abortion should be forced by the government any more than carrying and birthing an unwanted child should be forced.

    you’re arguing against china’s government having control over women’s wombs while you yourself think the US should enjoy the same power.

    i understand that the concept of a rational adult having rights over their own body seems silly to conservatives, but this is just silly.

  39. 39
    rikryah says:

    I’ll call it MURDER.

    keep on saying it.

  40. 40
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    Well, PP has loudly praised China’s one-child policy. I guess you should let them know you disagree.

    You rail against non-existent “forced birth” in the US will doing nothing about actual forced abortions (usually of girls) happening in China.

  41. 41
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    do you believe your wife’s womb belongs the her or to the united states government?

  42. 42
    Soonergrunt says:

    @Veritas: I don’t have a problem with it. Seriously. I DON’T GIVE A FUCK WHO ABORTS HOW MANY BABIES OR WHY. This is because unlike you, I am not so emotionally crippled as to obsess about what other people do or don’t do in order to feel better about myself.
    And again, since you don’t give a shit one way or the other about the living, why, other than obsessing about the sex that others are having without you, do you care?

  43. 43
    Roxie says:

    I can’t escape this Veritas thing. Just saw him/her/it at The Washington Times(?) site under some phony election map that predicts Obama will only win 11 states. He has become a ruiner of threads around here of late. This will be the last time I mention or read any of his lame bullshit. Can everyone please do the same?

  44. 44
    Marc says:

    It’s complete bullshit to let a troll make this thread about abortions for gender selection. Omit the posts from the jackass and confine the discussion to the actual topic of the post.

    This is *not* about abortions at all. It’s about allowing women to access health care at a place that can perform abortions with independently provided funds.

  45. 45
    slag says:

    @Tom Levenson:

    And this has to do with preventative care for breast cancer exactly how?

    Isn’t it obvious? You have to kill the woman to save her! She may die of breast cancer but at least her embryonic daughter will have a chance of her very own to die of breast cancer too.

  46. 46
    joes527 says:

    OK. Not a Komen fan, but isn’t your analysis based on the idea that 6,700 women not screened with Komen funds via planned parenthood is equal to 6,700 fewer women screened.

    I’m not asserting that Komen is a good charity, but there seems to be a reasonable likelihood that they are going to apply at least some of the funds that they used to send to PP to support screening somewhere else.

    Now where that leaves poor women, inner city women, minority women, whatever demographic women … that is a very interesting question (probably with a really depressing answer)

    But more likely than this resulting in an absolute reduction in screening of women, this will result in a shift in which women will have screening available to them.

    And yeah, if Komen ends up just funding screening for women who are covered under insurance and would have been screened anyway, then this will probably reduce the total number of screenings performed.

  47. 47
    Veritas says:

    @Soonergrunt:

    Ok. I think sex-selective abortion is pretty fucking evil, personally, and has really bad consequences like gender imbalances in the population.

    But remember: you’re for women’s rights*

    *As soon as they pass through the birth canal.

  48. 48
    Marc says:

    @Tom Levenson:

    Shut him down.

  49. 49
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    You rail against non-existent “forced birth” in the US

    you want it to exist. hell, it does exist anyways due to limitations on 3rd trimester abortions in this country. you just want governments to have even more power over american women’s wombs than it already does.

    yet you bitch about how china’s government has too much control over women’s wombs. why is that?

  50. 50
    Veritas says:

    So how do you all feel about Germany’s law? Is Germany ruled by eeeeeevil right-wing “god botherers” and people who despise women?

  51. 51
    Zifnab says:

    DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS

  52. 52
    Cap'n Magic says:

    So in thinking they’re stopping one form of death they cause another. The hypocrisy of the neo-Phairesees knows no bounds.

  53. 53
    Veritas says:

    @Marc:

    LOL, I have over 100 proxies ready to go. Suck it.

    Wow, nothing makes liberals uncomfortable like having to defend their unfaliling devotion to the Cult of Abortion.

  54. 54
    Marc says:

    @joes527:

    In many parts of the country there isn’t an alternative.

    More to the point: these people have the freedom to endorse the anti-choice agenda and I have the freedom to boycott whatever they do.

  55. 55
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    Oh, so you think Roe didn’t go far enough? That third trimester abortions should be an absolute, unalaterable right as well? Right up to the due date?

  56. 56
    Marc says:

    @Veritas:

    We want to talk about the actual topic of the post, not whatever irrelevant horseshit that you want to make the central issue.

  57. 57
    slag says:

    @Soonergrunt: I have to admit…I’m a judger. I judge women who are stupid enough to want boys instead of girls. Not enough to take away their right to do so, but I judge. Just like I judge “Veritas”s reflexive mouthbreathing. Not enough to take away “Veritas”s right to mouthbreathe, but I judge.

  58. 58
    Raven says:

    @Soonergrunt: Just cut the head of this fucking snake. He’s a waste of time.

  59. 59
    kay says:

    I don’t know, I’m thinking it’s good it’s all coming out.
    Korman has board members who started The Muttering Network.
    That’s the outfit that sets up fake clinics in rural areas to trick women into thinking they’re getting medical care.
    We have one about 2 miles from me.
    This apparently goes fairly deep, and donors didn’t know.
    Now they know.

  60. 60
    Veritas says:

    Seriously, there’s not even one feminist who thinks sex-selective abortion is a bad idea?

  61. 61
    Tom Levenson says:

    @joes527: Note the escape hatch I put into the footnotes: this is based on an assumption that the funds won’t be replaced.

    If they are, then, of course, the harm that would result from the decline in access to care won’t take place. But I’m interested in the ethics/morality of Komen’s choice, not that of those who may or may not step in to mitigated the consequences of that initial act.

  62. 62
    Soonergrunt says:

    And since SGK’s decision will not prevent one single abortion in the world, it’s fucking stupid on that level as well.
    In fact, the money that we would have spent on them and their products (and that’s a couple of thousand bucks a year since my mother died of cancer and my sister has had a couple of lumpectomies) will now go to support Planned Parenthood’s reproductive health services, specifically (if possible) to directly fund terminations. And I’ll do it Tbogg-style:

    We’ve done this before, but you can make a donation to Planned Parenthood and request a thank you card be sent to:
    Karen Handel
    Senior VP of Fail
    c/o Susan G. Komen Foundation
    P.O. Box 650309
    Dallas, TX 75265-0309

    Make sure you do it as “honorary giving” and not “one time gift” if you want the post card sent to Ms. Handel

  63. 63
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Marc: I don’t ban or give time outs unless the commenter becomes directly, personally abusive to other folks here. Aggressive stupidity and monotonous repetition of the same bluster doesn’t count, though it is tedious, I’ll admit.

    The troll is baiting you. Don’t take the hook.

  64. 64
    Redshift says:

    @Seanly: Lakoff wrote a book on the meaning of “freedom” to those of different political persuasions. IIRC, those in the conservative movement tend to believe that “freedom” means “freedom to do the right thing,” which is why we hear them talking about protesting or criticizing the government (when Republicans are in charge) as “abusing your freedoms.” People are naturally bad, and need discipline and authority to be “free,” in this view.

  65. 65
    kdaug says:

    @Veritas:

    why should you care? It’s just a clump of cells or a blob of jelly right?

    No, son. You’re just a clump of cells and a blob of jelly.

  66. 66
    The Moar You Know says:

    Shut him down.

    @Marc: There is no way to shut down a professional griefer like this. He’s over at WaPo, he shits all over at least four thread a day here, he’s hitting Starbucks employee sites and God knows what else. I’d prefer that he at least keeps the same handle so that we know who it is.

    Everyone here knows who he is but somehow just has to engage with him anyhow. It’s pretty dismaying, the lack of self control on the part of the commentariat.

  67. 67
    kay says:

    And, “muttering network” should be “nurture network”
    That’s some serious wingnut, right there.
    It looks as if this is yet another Right wing org, it’s just donors didn’t know it.

  68. 68
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    it’s a woman’s body, it’s her choice. period.

    do you think your wife’s womb belongs to her or to the united states government?

  69. 69
    joes527 says:

    @Marc:

    In many parts of the country there isn’t an alternative.

    Agree 100% That was what I was getting at with the demographic argument. This is going to be unmitigated badness for many individuals, and probably many identifiable subgroups within the overall population.

    I was responding to Tom’s argument, which was based on statistical averages over total population. That argument doesn’t address who dies, just how many. And the “how many” question isn’t as easy to answer as it looks because it isn’t clear how many fewer screenings will be performed in the total population due to Komen’s douche-baggery.

  70. 70
    schrodinger's cat says:

    The Republicans and their friends hide their agenda, their real agenda. In the abortion wars, the ultimate goal is to legislate morality. Abortion is just a convenient excuse to further this agenda.
    In the illegal immigration debate, the bigots want to demonize immigrants who are not white, so they go after a softer target, illegal immigrants.
    In short, they want to turn back the clock, go back to the time, when only landowning men had rights and everyone else knew their place.

  71. 71
    Marc says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    The approach used for graffiti is pretty effective. If you erase it as soon as it goes up they eventually stop bothering.

    “Don’t answer” becomes a pretty useless tactic when someone is willing to post 20, 30, 40, 50, …100 posts in a given discussion. That’s like walking into a seminar with a bullhorn and chanting.

  72. 72
    Surly Duff says:

    The Komen Foundation’s decision links directly to illness, to death and loss and dreadful sorrow left behind.

    And this is what needs to be emphasized over and over again. In order to ensure the “sanctity of life” for the unborn, they are effectively ignoring the sanctity of the lives of women affected by their decisions. Isn’t the common refrain that they are only interested in protecting the rights of people before they are born?

  73. 73
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Veritas:

    @chopper: Well, PP has loudly praised China’s one-child policy.

    Let’s see the cite, to a verifiable source. The only relevant reference I could find on plannedparenthood.org is from the mideast-Tennessee branch, which says

    We were shocked and repulsed by the
    “one-child” policy of China that forced women to have abortions against their will.

    On a possibly-related topic, is the 9th Commandment still law for Christians, or did Peter’s magic sheet of forbidden foods supersede it?

  74. 74
    Soonergrunt says:

    @chopper: He thinks her womb belongs to him. Just like his daughter’s womb until she marries. He just wants to use the USG to enforce that.

  75. 75
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    i think sex-selective abortions suck, but i don’t own womens’ bodies. there are a lot of things that suck out there. you think the government should have power over all of them? or is it just your wife’s uterus?

  76. 76
    Chyron HR says:

    Damn, less than 24 hours after Romney’s alleged VICTORY!! in FL and not even his one remaining supporter can do anything but desperately change the subject.

  77. 77
    joes527 says:

    @Tom Levenson: Footnotes? Who reads footnotes?

    (hmmm… actually I do usually read the footnotes. I picked a heck of a post to skip ’em)

  78. 78
    Veritas says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    I don’t post at the Washington Post. It’s somebody else. I hate that rag.@chopper:

    It belongs to here. But I think at some point between conception and birth, and well before the limits of Roe, the fetus’s body belongs to the fetus (strangely, the European Socialists agree with me and not you on this point. Only American Leftists have an unfailing devotion to abortion that borders on the disturbing).

  79. 79
    Redshift says:

    @kay: Does anyone know if this is like the attempted takeover of the Sierra Club a few years back, or has Komen been this way for a while?

  80. 80
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    My view is pretty nuanced, and the longer passage got stuck in moderation for some reason, but I think the embryo becomes fully human sometime after conception and sometime before birth, recent advances in embryology and ultrasound technology confirm this. You could reasonably believe in the 70s that it was just a clump of cells or a blob of jelly, but it’s just being dishonest to take that position today.

    Funny that European Soc1alists don’t find this concept controversial, but American Leftists do.

  81. 81
    Veritas says:

    Oh, and sex-selective abortion should be banned in toto, it’s pretty obviously discrimination against females (and has bad consequences for society if done en masse).

  82. 82
    The Moar You Know says:

    The approach used for graffiti is pretty effective. If you erase it as soon as it goes up they eventually stop bothering.

    @Marc: John will not moderate the forum or delete posts save for the most extreme cases, which this is not. I would not run my own site this way but I understand why he runs his this way.

    Self-control works. He’s been run out of threads before when everyone ignores him. For whatever reason, that self-control is rarely in evidence here.

  83. 83
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    the embryo becomes fully human sometime after conception and sometime before birth

    wow, with that level of specificity you could be a politician.

    so basically you believe that up until 12 weeks’ gestation your wife’s womb belongs to her, but after that it belongs to the government, or at least custody is shared. the same government you conservatives think fucks up everything it touches.

    jesus wept.

  84. 84
    Mike in NC says:

    Pie filter is working overtime today!

  85. 85
    Redshift says:

    @Marc:

    “Don’t answer” becomes a pretty useless tactic when someone is willing to post 20, 30, 40, 50, …100 posts in a given discussion. That’s like walking into a seminar with a bullhorn and chanting.

    I agree. It’s been repeatedly proven all over the Internet that “just ignore them” is not an effective way to keep trolls from trashing a discussion, and bemoaning the inability of BJ commenters to do it is pretty tiresome. Considering the extreme openness policy here (which is a choice John is entitled to make), we’re actually amazingly good at not feeding the trolls compared to most forums, which just further illustrates that that’s not enough.

  86. 86
    patroclus says:

    Another action item should be for all of us to contact the NFL and get the football league out of the business of supporting this horrific right wing organization. Just like everyone else, the NFL has been fooled by the marketing shtick that the Komen Foundation actually cares about breast cancer whereas what they really care about is extremist right wing ideology.

    I do not wish to see any more NFL Pinkout’s because that just means that the well-paid right wing liars at Komen are just going to receive more unjust enrichment.

  87. 87
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    The question isn’t about the womb it’s about the fetus and when it becomes human. Nobody has the right to off another person that’s dependent on them just because they don’t feel like taking care of them anymore.

  88. 88
    Veritas says:

    I mean, hell, when does it stop then? Peter Singer thinks we should legalize infanticide and killing of the mentally disabled using much the same logic that pro-choice folks use.

  89. 89
    Emma says:

    @Veritas: I’m with you. JUST as soon as the US government provides the same safety net that the German one does. You know, contraception if you don’t want to get pregnant, the government-or-employer covered health insurance, the pre-and-post parental leave paid by the government or the employer. You know. THE STUFF WE DON’T HAVE IN THE US because jerks like you keep telling us it’s all about morals.

    Moron.

  90. 90
    patroclus says:

    And, for those of you affiliated with universities (like my alma mater TCU, which has supported the Komen Foundation for years), please contact them and ask them politely to terminate any and all affiliation with this right-wing organization. For years, they have literally taken over the campus at least one day a year because everyone supported them; getting free marketing, their theme song written by a TCU alum, hundreds of people doing a pro-Komen video and for all of that support, we get this absurd right wing behavior.

    They really should not be allowed to infect legitimate institutions such as colleges and universities with their hate-filled anti-women agenda.

  91. 91
    pragmatism says:

    @Veritas: maybe you should go ask on a blog that is more targeted to feminists?

  92. 92
    Veritas says:

    @Emma:

    So…a right to life is dependent on how good your country’s safety net is?

  93. 93
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    yes, it’s about the womb. does your wife get to make decisions about what happens in her womb or doesn’t she? does she get to decide whether or not she wants to put in an implant to prevent pregnancy? does she get to decide whether or not she gets treatment for cervical cancer? does she get to decide whether or not she gets a hysterectomy?

    in my world she has all of those even if i don’t personally like the decision. she also gets to decide whether or not that womb carries a fetus to term. in your world the big bad overreaching gummint is your wife’s womb’s legal guardian. at least after 12 weeks, and even before then it gets to decide based on gender.

  94. 94
    Veritas says:

    In France, doctors can even object to performing abortions based on their conscince.

    I can only imagine the howling from American leftists if that were the law here.

  95. 95
    bemused says:

    @kay:

    I just read that in Mother Jones. When I first read the AP/Wapo notice yesterday, I got an instant feeling that something really reeked at Komen and just wondered how long before we’d start finding out who was responsible. Not long.

  96. 96
    Exurban Mom says:

    @balconesfault: The difference between your decision to go to the game and Komen’s decision to pull funding is that PP was counting on those funds. They were expecting those funds. They used those funds in past years to provide services, and now they won’t be there.

    What’s also disturbing to me about Komen is how much they spend on administrative and fundraising costs. Huge dollars.

  97. 97
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Veritas: I’m still waiting on that cite, and on whether the 9th Commandment is still law for Christians.

  98. 98
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    and china forces abortion on women using the same logic you use. let’s let the government decide what to do with your womb! it knows best, after all, when it comes to wombs.

  99. 99
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    What on Earth makes you think I oppose birth control or voluntary sterilization? None of those things involve the moral complications that come when something involves another living thing.

  100. 100
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    you know when a conservative is arguing ‘but that’s the way they do it in france’ he’s scraping the bag for powder.

  101. 101
    Rathskeller says:

    @Soonergrunt: Thank you, that was all I was looking for in this quickly-derailed thread.

    DON’T FEED THE TROLLS

  102. 102
    trollhattan says:

    Back on topic–it would seem as though Komen has either turned chickenshit or/and the fix was in once this Karen Handel trixie came on board. Any thoughts as to whether she’s in kahoots with Cliff Stearns(R, dipshitville), who’s “investigating” PP? It seems awfully conveeeenient that Komen bylaws forbid giving money to any agency “under investigation.”

    “We’re kind of reeling,” said Patrick Hurd, who is CEO of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Virginia — recipient of a 2010 grant from Komen — and whose wife, Betsi, is a veteran of several Komen fundraising races and is currently battling breast cancer.
    __
    “It sounds almost trite, going through this with Betsi, but cancer doesn’t care if you’re pro-choice, anti-choice, progressive, conservative,” Hurd said. “Victims of cancer could care less about people’s politics.”

  103. 103
    kay says:

    I don’t know, Redshift.
    I do know the fake-clinic people, though, and putting them on the board means the ideological capture must go deep.
    This is a charity that supposedly supports research.
    The fake-clinic folks hand out drugstore pregnancy tests and religious tracts to the women who mistakenly believe they are entering a “free clinic”
    I just don’t know how “research” fits in w/ what is a 19th century approach to women’s health.
    I think it’s a huge red flag that wasn’t known prior to this.
    Scalia’s wife is a big player in the fake clinic scam, so that’s the general level of extreme wingnut/religious we’re talking about.

  104. 104
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Veritas: Violating my own commandment here: Veritas. You are not simply a troll. You are a bad troll.

    US doctors are not compelled to perform abortions. Individual doctors can — and do — refuse to perform them essentially without constraint.

    Pro tip: if you want to persuade people, don’t say obviously misleading stuff.

  105. 105
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    you think the government has a compelling interest in control of your wife’s womb. either a woman has control over her womb or she doesn’t.

  106. 106
    geg6 says:

    Here’s a list of all the Komen corporate sponsors:

    http://ww5.komen.org/CorporatePartners.aspx

    Looks like I’ll be busy mailing out a lot of letters explaining why I will no longer patronize them.

  107. 107
    Veritas says:

    @Tonal Crow:

    http://www.lifenews.com/2011/0.....ld-policy/

    As for the 9th Commandment, go ask a Christian.

  108. 108
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    I think the government has a compelling interest in protecting a person’s life.

  109. 109
    brettvk says:

    Amanda Marcotte has a really interesting argument here about the creeping conflation on the Right of abortion/birth control/reproductive health procedures of any kind. You can see this in how the condemnation has moved from abortion to BCPs to Gardasil; you can see it in our resident troll’s flying leap from Komen to abortion stats. It’s always and forever been about fear of women’s sexuality, never really about the feti.

    In their dreams, the fundamentalists will be able to limit reproductive health care to the properly married and reproducing wives of the proper men. Unattached women who dare to exercise bodily autonomy will be denied access to health care as punishment — maybe excepting pregnancy, because of course the “child” comes first. Eventually it will be established “fact” that breast cancer is only contracted through abortion; thus good women won’t need mammograms, and the dirty sluts with cancer will hide their shame until they die.

  110. 110
    slag says:

    @chopper: And that’s what you don’t understand. In the conservative mind, the steps are simple:

    1. Reduce a woman’s personal sovereignty.
    2. Create more women with less personal sovereignty.
    3. Achieve equality!

    That’s why conservatives are the real feminists. They get it.

  111. 111
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Veritas: An ex-official of PP? That’s Planned Parenthood loudly praising Chinese policy?

    You should stop now. You have hit bottom and begun to dig.

  112. 112
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Veritas: lifenews.com? I said “verifiable source”, not “crank winger website”. Also, even accepting the source for the sake of argument, a statement of a former director of an organization is not usually considered a statement of the organization, let alone a “loud” statement.

    Mislead much?

    On the 9th Commandment, you’ve been making yourself out as an expert on Christianity [ETA: in other threads here], and have been pimping various right-wing “Christian” themes, so I thought you’d like the opportunity to answer that question. Guess it’s too tough. Heh.

  113. 113
    Surly Duff says:

    @Veritas:

    You do know a lot of Indian and Chinese couples come to the US for specifically that purpose, right? To abort girls? Because the United States has some of the most liberal and lax abortion laws in the entire world, even more so than western Europe. Interesting article on this issue…

    Umm…the article author states “couples from China and India fly to Los Angeles to undergo PGD [a genetic testing procedure] at Fertility Institutes, a clinic I visited last year”. No statistics, just an anecdote. And while the assumption is that these couples would seek abortions if met with unwanted news, the author makes no efforts to link the PGD procedure to abortions. And there is definitely no mention of lots of couples coming to the United States for abortions.

    It helps to read the article you claim supports your argument. Except when you are arguing in bad faith I suppose. Dolt.

  114. 114
    Emma says:

    @Veritas</@Veritas: Read this and tell me how much you forced-birthers value children.

  115. 115
    Veritas says:

    @Tonal Crow:

    I have an interest in religious history but I can’t swallow the idea of a god, let alone a personal one interested in us.

  116. 116
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Tom Levenson: And again, I remind myself: this thread is, to me, concerned with the damage done by restricting access to preventative care. Anything else is an attempt to distract from the crux: people are willing to deny care to actual live women in order to make sure that other women may not receive other care in other circumstances, paid for by other people’s money.

  117. 117
    trollhattan says:

    @brettvk:

    I’m more than a little bothered by how much Republican pushback there is against contraception. Were Santorum a more “serious” candidate he’s make it a cornerstone of the party platform, which ironically could clue in the general public about what’s happening unbeknownst to them.

    Who was the winger last year that defended covering boner pills but not contraception under health insuance? That blew my mind.

  118. 118
    Veritas says:

    forced birth

    You guys DO know how babies are made, right?

    right?

  119. 119
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    …by having control of your wife’s womb. why won’t you just come out and admit this instead of weaseling around? i’ve admitted that, despite my distate of late trimester abortion or sex-based abortion, women should have that right. why can’t you admit that you think the government should have control of your wife’s womb?

    is it uncomfortable? why?

  120. 120
    trollhattan says:

    @Tom Levenson:

    No time like the present to dredge up Senator Jon Kyle’s “not intended to be a factual statement” statement.

    “Everybody goes to clinics, to doctors, to hospitals, so on,” Kyl said. “Some people go to Planned Parenthood. But you don’t have to go to Planned Parenthood to get your cholesterol or your blood pressure checked. If you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood, and that’s well over 90% of what Planned Parenthood does.”

  121. 121
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    Does saying you can’t commit infanticide mean “the government has control of your home”?

  122. 122
    jibeaux says:

    If you gotta feed somebody, feed yourself.
    Fresh Market has a pretty good rotisserie chicken + 2 lg sides + bread thing right now, I found out at lunch. $14. Not bad. Whole Foods is $15 and the chicken’s all cold & dried out. I’m always hunting for healthy, cheap dinner options for the fam. So won’t you join me — if we’re going to derail the thread, let’s talk recipes or something. If you’re on even more of a budget, you can do SO much with lentils….

  123. 123
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    answer my question, jackass. i’ve asked you several times about whether or not you think the government should have control of your wife’s womb. you keep weaseling out of it.

  124. 124
    geg6 says:

    @Veritas:

    The only mention of PP and China’s one child policy I could find was on forced birth and Christianist sites and then, the best they could do is hang this one a “former executive with Planned Parenthood.”

    Dude, your troll fu is weak, weak, weak.

  125. 125
    Veritas says:

    BTW if you’re so into bodily autonomy, why are you for government mandates to purchase insurance?

  126. 126
    pragmatism says:

    saw over at the GOS a response email from komen. highlights:

    I want to assure you that there has been no blanket decision made to discontinue funding to Planned Parenthood or to cut back on the mammography services to underserved women. That
    said, because of the nature of some of the past Planned Parenthood grants, total grant funding to Planned Parenthood will decline as part of our new strategy.

    their point seems to be, we’re not going to cut 100% but we will be cutting back, so don’t be upset. that dog ain’t gonna hunt.

  127. 127
    The Moar You Know says:

    why can’t you admit that you think the government should have control of your wife’s womb?

    is it uncomfortable? why?

    @chopper: He’s a virgin, silly.

  128. 128
    Tom Levenson says:

    @jibeaux: Had lamb sausage pasta last night, gotta shop for dinner in a moment. Hmmm….

    At least I won’t burden the thread with the recipe for the grotesque English war-ration dessert served in me Mum’s school and known to her and her classmates as “Boiled British Baby.” (For real!)

    [ducks]

  129. 129
    makewi says:

    It’s just a shame that PP always chooses abortion over every other thing. Then again, it does account for around 40% of it’s income – so I guess they are just being good capitalists.

  130. 130
  131. 131
    Veritas says:

    @chopper:

    Your argument is really similar to those who were against child abuse and spousal abuse laws because it would be THE GOVERNMENT CONTROLLING MY FAMILY!

    Insamuch as the government “controls my home” by forbidding me to beat my wife or children, yes.

  132. 132
    PurpleGirl says:

    @joes527: In many places there are no other alternatives to PP. And it would cost a hell of lot more to start from scratch to build a new clinic. PP has the experience and the name recognition of many years of service.

  133. 133
    chopper says:

    @Veritas:

    you’re not answering the question.

  134. 134
    slag says:

    @Tom Levenson: Yeah. But who cares if they die an untimely death after they’re born? Especially if it’s through inadequate medical care. What matters most is what happens before they’re born. No one wants to see a perfectly good fetus go to waste. A perfectly good woman, however…totally expendable.

  135. 135
    Tom Levenson says:

    @makewi: Funny. I always thought it was the women who chose.

    Agency is a terrifying thing, isn’t it.

  136. 136
    The Moar You Know says:

    I want to assure you that there has been no blanket decision made to discontinue funding to Planned Parenthood or to cut back on the mammography services to underserved women. That said, because of the nature of some of the past Planned Parenthood grants, total grant funding to Planned Parenthood will decline as part of our new strategy.

    @pragmatism: Breathtaking pivot. Why can’t Romney do that?

  137. 137
    jibeaux says:

    @pragmatism: Uh, no. I am not “assured.”
    I don’t know if I’m representative or not and I know I have a lot of liberal friends, but judging by my facebook there’s not going to be a woman within spitting distance of the internet alive who isn’t aware of this. I can’t imagine that was the effect they were going for.

  138. 138
    makewi says:

    @Tom Levenson:

    It’s also funny how you are pretending to not understand. Ignorance is bliss?

  139. 139
    patroclus says:

    @pragmatism: Yeah, I saw that thread over at the GOS with the “response” from the avowedly right-wing Komen organization. I don’t think I have ever seen more media-consultant-inspired-insipid gobbledygook. On the other hand, it does indicate that there is at least some disagreement with this pathetic action taken by the new well-paid right-wing Komen execs.

    In that thread, there is also a comment containing their prior response (back when they actually did oppose breast cancer), which is well-written, logical, informative and persuasive.

  140. 140
    Ahasuerus says:

    For all of you would-be troll feeders out there, the best way to fight the urge is to use either Cleek’s pie filter or The Other Chuck’s troll filter. I can testify that they both work wonderfully on Firefox.

  141. 141
    beltane says:

    I am in favor of mandatory vasectomies for all right-wing males. Think of what a better place this world would be if such a policy were enacted.

  142. 142
    bemused says:

    @pragmatism:

    Pfft. Not good enough. Even if Komen reversed completely on the grant funding, I would never think of supporting them in any way. The onion is getting peeled and it’s rotten at the center.

  143. 143
    pragmatism says:

    @The Moar You Know: this is the new strategy that is referred to in the above quote:

    This issue is part of a bigger initiative at Komen to adjust our granting strategy with a desire to focus on key outcomes

    hmmmmm i wonder what key outcomes they mean?

  144. 144
    jibeaux says:

    @Tom Levenson:
    Thanks, but it’s borked now. We’ve gone past the Feeding of No Return.

  145. 145
    dmsilev says:

    @jibeaux: Back in the day, that was a common DailyKos approach to trolls: start posting recipes, the longer and more involved the better. Eventually, there were enough recipes posted to publish a cookbook, a copy of which I have somewhere (signature recipe: Trollhouse Cookies…)

  146. 146
    kindness says:

    Shit. Veritas killed the thread.

    Good job asshole.

  147. 147
    pragmatism says:

    more bullshit:

    It is regrettable when changes in priorities and policies affect any of our grantees, such as a longstanding partner like Planned Parenthood. However, like all organizations, we must continue to evolve and meet ever higher standards of excellence, so that we can most fully advance our mission. Our grant-making decisions are not about politics. Our
    priority is and always will be the women we serve. Any efforts to make this political or leverage it for fundraising purposes would be a disservice to women.

  148. 148
    Nancy says:

    Here’s that number again:

    According to a new Polipulse analysis of online conversations about the issue, only 26 percent of people believe Komen made the right decision. Nearly a quarter of the people who expressed criticism of Komen’s decision online said they were going to pull their donations from Komen.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....47262.html

  149. 149
    chopper says:

    @makewi:

    clearly. that’s why when you walk into PP to get an ultrasound they go ‘welcome to Abortion City! how many abortions do you want to get today? please say “a lot” because i get paid on commission!’

  150. 150
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Veritas: In other words, no apology for screechingly preaching a falsehood will be forthcoming. Amirite?

  151. 151
    pragmatism says:

    @patroclus: they ain’t in that sort of business any more. well written, logical, etc.—those be liberal elitistismish things.

  152. 152
    brettvk says:

    I have no coding skills, but would praise those of the person who creates a pie filter for Chrome.

  153. 153
    patroclus says:

    @Nancy: I’m guessing that 26% is low and that the real number of supporters of the Komen right-wingers is 27%.:-)

  154. 154
    brettvk says:

    @pragmatism: Sweet Goddess, what a load of PR shit.

  155. 155
    jibeaux says:

    @dmsilev: Oh, cool. Sort of a Troll Filibuster.

  156. 156
    Roxie says:

    @brettvk: Here’s one

  157. 157
    pragmatism says:

    @brettvk: politifact will score it as 100% true. glen kessler will give it negative 4 pinnochios.

  158. 158
    patroclus says:

    @pragmatism: Yeah, I know. The prior response was lengthy and went into great detail about how the Komen Foundation had actually analysed the local situation in numerous communities across the country and had determined that low income access to breast cancer screenings in some communities was ONLY provided by Planned Parenthood, so to truly have a national program designed to address breast cancer, Komen simply HAD to provide funding to PP. Otherwise, some communities would be left out.

    So now, based on Komen’s own work, we know that some communities are not going to be able to effectively deal with low income access, and that some low income women are not going to be screened at all (unless PP can find alternative funding). Put another way, Komen has consciously taken the decision to defund breast screenings in some local communities that otherwise have no breast screening availability to low income women. Pitiful!

  159. 159
    PurpleGirl says:

    @jibeaux: I like how you think. I often buy burgers at a nearby bagel cafe because I like the extras they add and I don’t have to get fries with the burger and it’s $3.50 a burger. (For years my refrigerator hasn’t worked too well and chopped meat went bad quickly. Buy a burger at the bagel cafe means I get the burger I want and I won’t have to throw out meat gone bad.) I also buy a slice a pizza and add pepperoni, mushrooms, onions, etc.

  160. 160
    pragmatism says:

    @patroclus: i was checking out the komen page on facebook last night. standard wingnut response: why are libruls presuming that poor people can’t get these screenings elsewhere? libruls treat poor people like they are stupid.

  161. 161
    PurpleGirl says:

    @pragmatism: That’s some walk back. What happened to the not funding an organization that’s under investigation?

  162. 162
    trollhattan says:

    @brettvk:

    Thanks! Of course it would be Hannity–who surely has the most sluggable mug amongst the entire Fox collection.

  163. 163
    makewi says:

    @chopper:

    It’s OK. You prefer to pretend that this is a result that PP could have done nothing to prevent. I think that’s a fairly common feeling around here. PP is a victim of the VRWC amirite?

  164. 164
    jibeaux says:

    @PurpleGirl: I like it! My favorite local Chinese place has a “dinner for one” that’s $10.95. It’s got a ton of rice, a large entree, a soup, and a fortune cookie. I don’t know if we’re just small eaters or Americans are fatasses or both, but if I saute some greens or broccoli or something from my CSA membership and add to it, the four of us can eat the dinner for one.
    EDIT: Oh yeah, and a spring roll!

  165. 165
    4tehlulz says:

    Successful threadjack is successful.

  166. 166
    brettvk says:

    @Roxie: Thanks! I think I actually figured out how to activate it!

  167. 167
    gwangung says:

    @makewi: Don’t insult our intelligence.

    You used to do better. I’m disappointed.

  168. 168

    @Nancy: 26% Not the magic 27%? :)

    There’s no excuse for Komen to do this. None. Because if you start dictating when and how and for what reason a woman gets health care, then you’ve just made half the population expendable.

    An odd stance for an organization that says it wants to save women’s lives.

    I mean, at least they are honest now! Let’s see how they do with their cards on the table. I’m totally okay for the court of Public Opinion to rule.

  169. 169
    Roxie says:

    @brettvk: Isn’t it wonderful! I think my eye stopped twitching

  170. 170
    pragmatism says:

    @PurpleGirl: i’d wager that they did not anticipate a negative response and that they realize that the “under investigation” angle doesn’t play well outside of the forced birth echochamber.

  171. 171
    makewi says:

    @gwangung:

    No you’re not. What you are is safely encased in the idea that everything bad that happens to something you love is the result of actions by bad actors. What you are is a fantasist. At some point in order to come back to the reality that the majority of the world inhabits, you are going to have to admit that all that quacking might in fact represent a duck – and not, say Dick Cheney with a duck whistle lying in wait to shoot you in the face.

  172. 172
    just me says:

    So, if you are angry at Komen , just divert your donation to PP. Here’s the link. It’s pretty darn easy.

    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/

  173. 173
    brettvk says:

    @WereBear (itouch): Judging from the information I’ve seen on their salaries and their disbursement choices, some strong sunlight and lots’n’lots of publicity is needed. It may have become just another spigot for wingnut welfare.

  174. 174
    Chyron HR says:

    @makewi:

    Hello, number 2. When will the other 98 Veritas clones show up?

  175. 175
    polyorchnid octopunch says:

    @Veritas: I have a question. Who owns your body?

  176. 176
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Tonal Crow: Looks like I was right. Didn’t “veritas” used to mean “truthfulness”? Or have wingers rewritten that history, too?

  177. 177
    Pongo says:

    @Veritas: @Barbara: I agree. Working in the nonprofit world, I’ve heard plenty about SBK’s dirty laundry and nasty practices. Still, nothing prepared me for this absurdity. It’s not so much the total irony of an organization that supposedly exists for women’s health cowering to the demands of those vocally opposed to funding women’s health initiatives, as it is the mind-bogglingly bad governance on display. You simply can’t politicize your mission. It’s an abuse of public trust. People don’t donate to Komen so that Komen can throw their political weight around. They donate to them so they will provide programs for breast cancer detection and treatment–like the one they just very publicly de-funded.

    They have a lot of clout, so maybe they will skate on this atrocity like they have on many others, but if they were honest about their rationale for doing this (which they aren’t), they would also be in violation of their 501c3 designation which precludes them from engaging in excessive political or religious activity. If they want to lobby or organize on behalf of political interests they are free to do so–just not under this tax designation, which allows donors to take a tax exemption with the understanding that the organization will use these donations in neutral fashion, in accord with the mission outlined in the paperwork on file with the IRS, for the good of the community–not to support a narrow political agenda of one of your board members.

    This is just a bad all around decision by this board, regardless of the issue. They should not be concerning themselves with any social or political topic of any sort that is not addressed by their mission because that is not what the public is paying them to do. Sadly, Komen can’t ‘throw the bums’ out because Komen is the bums.

  178. 178
    Maus says:

    http://www.komenadvocacy.org/content.aspx?id=466

    “Jane Abraham — President of Abraham Strategies LLC., a small business that handles strategic marketing assignments for a variety of clients. She also is the General Chairman of the Susan B. Anthony List, a not-for-profit membership organization and connected Political Action Committee that supports pro-life political candidates and issues. The wife of former Senator and U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham, she has long been a breast cancer advocate, having actively participated for a number of years in both the annual Komen Race for the Cure held in Washington, D.C., as well as the two Race for the Cure events hosted in her home state of Michigan. She also currently serves on the boards of the Detroit-based Covenant House Michigan serving at-risk and homeless youth, the Arab American National Museum and The Nurturing Network, an international charitable organization that responds to the immediate and comprehensive needs of women facing the crisis of an unplanned pregnancy.”

    Gosh, with her on the board, and an antichoice activist for a VP, I wonder who’s going to get the donations now?

    Oh. Right. “Crisis Pregnancy” centers and the Nurturing Network.

  179. 179
    trollhattan says:

    @Tonal Crow:

    O’Keefe has killed use of the word for the next…let’s stipulate two decades. Maybe Madonna will title an album “Veritas” and really finish the job?

  180. 180
    Mnemosyne says:

    So, just to be clear, Veritas and makewi are willing to have their mothers and sisters die a slow, painful death from breast cancer so they can be sure that no baybeez were harmed by Planned Parenthood in the course of providing breast exams and mammograms.

    I’m sure their mothers will be happy to sacrifice their own lives just to prevent an anonymous woman from having a first-trimester abortion.

  181. 181
    slag says:

    Yes. This is all Planned Parenthood’s fault. Everybody knows by now that if the ladies want care for the tattas, they have to sacrifice care for the hoohas. I’m pretty sure that’s even in the bible somewhere.

  182. 182
    kay says:

    That Medicare Advantage data is amazing.
    Obama cut 500 billion out of Medicare Advantage, and they expanded coverage and reduced premiums.
    Conservatives were overpaying by 500 BILLION dollars (0ver 10 years).
    Worst money managers ever.
    The think tank conservatives are frantically setting up roundtables to bullshit their way out of this one!
    Just delicious.

  183. 183
    JPL says:

    The problem isn’t just the Koman foundation, it’s the attack on Planned Parenthood from all directions. The board of planned parenthood should have an ad on TV promoting their good work, whether it be mammograms for low income, pap smears or healthy baby care. The organization was not ready for the onslaught of abuse they have taken in the last year.

  184. 184
    Amir Khalid says:

    A quibble. A senior officer of The Susan G. Komen Foundation has just cut off one of its longstanding allies because of her own personal politics — abusing her position and thwarting the Foundation’s mission of preventing women from dying of breast cancer. As Tom Levenson says, the likely result is that a number of low-income women will die of it. The Foundation needs to rescind Karen Handel’s action and maybe fire her too.

    But if it doesn’t, I would call the consequences death by negligent manslaughter rather than murder. Murder would be if Handel’s action somehow directly caused the women to get cancer. What she’s doing takes away their access to cancer screening, preventing them from seeking life-saving medical care. Any resulting deaths would be her fault, sure, but not by her hand or at her direction. So they would not be murder.

    Like I said, a quibble. But If you’re going to call somebody’s actions out, you need to be exactly right on what they did wrong.

    @Veritas:
    This thread is about wrongly cutting off help for women who might have breast cancer. You’re picking a fight over the morality of abortion, an entirely unrelated matter, for the sake of picking a fight. You pathetic little attention whore.

  185. 185
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Maus:

    I always want to remind right-wingers that when Susan B. Anthony made her anti-abortion remarks, antibiotics did not yet exist, so women were genuinely risking their lives by having a surgery that could easily go septic and kill them, or at least ruin their fertility.

    But, as we can see from the wingers in this thread, logic and history aren’t exactly their strong points. I’m surprised they aren’t arguing that abortion upsets the four humors.

  186. 186
    Maus says:

    @kay:

    Conservatives were overpaying by 500 BILLION dollars (0ver 10 years).
    Worst money managers ever.

    “Fiscal conservatists” are never about fiscal conservatism. It’s always about crony capitalism.

  187. 187
    makewi says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    These are the things you tell yourself so that you don’t have to think. A relief for you I’d imagine.

  188. 188
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    OT: John Harris of Politico is working overtime to make excuses for Mitt Romney. Tweety, to his partial credit, is having very little of it, not quite none of it.

  189. 189
    Mnemosyne says:

    @makewi:

    I’m not the one who thinks that an embryo’s life is more important than a grown woman’s life.

    Your mother knows that you’re content to watch her die a slow, painful death so you can tell yourself that you protected the baybeez from the evil Planned Parenthood, right?

  190. 190
    JPL says:

    This is good news and certainly something to give the right pause.

    New research offers hope for the first pill to treat a common problem in young women: fibroids in the uterus. The growths can cause pain, heavy bleeding and fertility problems, and they are the leading cause of hysterectomies……………
    In two studies, a lower dose of a “morning after” contraceptive pill stopped the bleeding and shrank the fibroids. It worked as well as shots of a hormone-blocking drug that has unpleasant side effects.

    nytimes

  191. 191
    The Moar You Know says:

    This is good news and certainly something to give the right pause.

    @JPL: You can’t be serious. This thread is pure proof that righties get their rocks off when women are in pain, or die needlessly. A woman crouched weeping in terror and pain, or laid out on a slab, is the goal, not a problem.

    They’re all looking to live Newt’s dream. The only way to do that is to have a steady supply of submissive, disposable vaginas.

  192. 192
    Maus says:

    @makewi:

    It’s just a shame that PP always chooses abortion over every other thing. Then again, it does account for around 40% of it’s income – so I guess they are just being good capitalists.

    It’s three percent, you lying scumbag.

    The rest is womens’ health and FAMILY PLANNING, aka preventing abortions.

    The only pro-abortion group are pro-lifers like you who would deny pro-choice women family planning.

    @The Moar You Know: He wasn’t talking about the thread, he was talking about his link.

  193. 193
    trollhattan says:

    Just to cement the beauty of it all, David Vitter(R, nearest whorehouse) chimes in.

    “This is a welcome, long-overdue decision that will make Komen more effective in the fight against breast cancer, which is why I wrote a letter to Komen’s founder and CEO last May urging her to take this step.”

  194. 194
    chopper says:

    @makewi:

    “seriously, what do i have to do to get you into an abortion today? we have great financing, no money down!”

  195. 195
    Mnemosyne says:

    @JPL:

    Mifeprestone (RU-486) turns out to be a pretty good anti-cancer drug, especially for brain tumors, but it’s controversial because OMG BAYBEEZ!

    Again, makewi and Veritas would be happy to watch the women in their lives die of brain tumors rather than let them use a naughty abortion drug to cure the tumor. It’s just the price those women have to pay so makewi and Veritas can feel good about themselves as Crusaders For The Unborn!

  196. 196
    makewi says:

    @Maus:

    3% of it’s “procedures” and 40% of it’s income. You ignorant person you.

  197. 197
    makewi says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    That must be it. We simply hate women and want to see them suffer. You found us out you brilliant sun of a gun.

  198. 198
    makewi says:

    @chopper:

    I’m just looking for a nice starter IUD. Something without to much in the way of repair costs. Maybe throw in a cup holder.

  199. 199
    pragmatism says:

    @makewi: control can be a form of hatred.

  200. 200
    bemused says:

    @pragmatism:

    Hmmm, didn’t anticipate, who could have known? Sounds familiar. The fact that they thought they could do this with little or no fuss is a rightwing fantasy. It really made me wonder who was running this outfit and then we find out some are anti-choice. What a surprise.

  201. 201
    The Moar You Know says:

    We simply hate women and want to see them suffer.

    @makewi: Everyone knows, old sport.

  202. 202
    pragmatism says:

    @bemused: they are icarus and flew too close to the sun. hubris is a hell of a drug.

  203. 203
    General Stuck says:

    Just one more front on the post elected Obama offensive against any number of real and imagined liberal causes/institutions.boogymen. Playing on drummed up fears over abortion, and rumored sekret liberal orgy dens. But when the rain washes away the bullshit, it is about elections, and weakening perceived and real voting bases of democrats to sap their loyalty and energy for fighting the good fight.

    I am sure that the wingnut psyche gets a special thrill out of keeping wimmon barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, but the manic energy of recent existential attacks on PPP, voting rights, the poor, abortion rights, unions etc… etc…., is over primal fears of loss of GOP control over the body politic in this country.

    And it isn’t an unfounded fear, given demographics and escalating concentration of wealth for the already rich, and building backlash of the American middle class over 30 year old republican lies of prosperity for all. And if a few unfortunate deaths of wimmon from now unfunded cancer screening occur, well, the wingnuts will gladly call it collateral damage in the greater cause of white supremacy as rightful rulers of this whackjob of a country.

    Listen to their candidate’s rhetoric over a second Obama term. It is utterly apocalyptic, with only question as to how far they will go to prevent the elimination of all things held dear for real Americans. In their lizard brane.

  204. 204
    Mnemosyne says:

    @makewi:

    You should probably try to conceal it better. Maybe pay a little lip service towards making contraception more widely available or getting insurance companies to make Gardasil available to both boys and girls so it’s a little less obvious what you’re up to when you weep and wail about the poor innocent baybeez.

  205. 205
    Maus says:

    @makewi:

    Regardless, your point is entirely irrelevant. If hot abortion cash-in-pocket was their intention, it would be more than 3% of procedures.

    Family planning with contraceptives and birth control devices/medications don’t take very long and don’t make much profit, of fucking course they would make up less of a percentage than invasive procedures in a clinic.

    And yet, non-abortion related health concerns cover the vast majority of PP’s business.

  206. 206
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Amir Khalid: The definition of murder in Federal law:

    Under U.S. federal law, murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.[3] Malice can be expressed (intent to kill) or implied. Implied malice is proven by acts that involve reckless indifference to human life or in a death that occurs during the commission of certain felonies (the felony murder rule).

    The criteria for 2nd degree murder:

    First degree murder involves a premeditated killing. In other words, the killer made a plan to kill the victim and then carried that plan out. Second degree murder does not require premeditation, however. Instead, there are three typical situations that can constitute second degree murder:

    A killing done impulsively without premeditation, but with malice aforethought
    A killing that results from an act intended to cause serious bodily harm
    A killing that results from an act that demonstrates the perpetrators depraved indifference to human life…

    …Depraved indifference to human life can mean different things in different jurisdictions, but in general it signifies that the perpetrator had an utter disregard for the potential damage to human life that their actions could cause.

    It is that last, the disregard for “the potential damage to human life” that moves this from manslaughter to this class of murder. I’ll admit that (a) I’m no lawyer and (b) even so, I suspect this would be a very hard sell in any court. We aren’t in court.

  207. 207
    ellie says:

    @makewi: You’re wrong. Less than 15% of total revenue comes from abortion services at Planned Parenthood.

    From Media Matters:
    http://mediamatters.org/research/201102180003

    Planned Parenthood Receives 15% Of Its Annual Revenue From Abortion Services. According to data from the most recent Planned Parenthood Annual Report:

    Abortion accounted for 3 percent of total services (approximately 328,308 of 10,943,609 services)
    At an average cost of $500, total revenue from abortion services was approximately $164,154,000
    Revenue from abortion services was less than 15 percent of the total annual revenue, which was $1,100,800,000 [Planned Parenthood Annual Report 2008-2009, accessed 2/17/11]

    Here is a link to PP’s annual report from which these numbers are referenced:
    http://www.plannedparenthood.o.....011_vF.pdf

  208. 208
    makewi says:

    @pragmatism:

    As it happens I’m not actually looking to control or restrict abortion. You’re welcome.

    On the flip side I understand that you folks are merely looking out for the child rapists and sex slave owners – cuz someone has to, amirite?

  209. 209
    Mark S. says:

    @chopper:

    I’m not going to pay a lot for this abortion!

  210. 210
    Tonal Crow says:

    @makewi:

    @Maus: 3% of it’s “procedures” and 40% of it’s income. You ignorant person you.

    Cite a reliable source for this assertion. “Reliable” means IRS filings or another primary source, or a story by NYT or a similar news source. It does not mean wingnut blogs. Also, it’s “its”, not “it’s”.

  211. 211
    Maus says:

    @pragmatism: God I hope the “Raising Awareness”-centric charity scam industry falls to pieces over this.

    I can’t wait for those chuggers to stop waiting on every corner downtown trying to get in my face. At least the homeless have a reason to be there, I don’t need to hear the smug assholes ganging up on people and taunting them for refusing to donate to Save the Children.

  212. 212
    Maus says:

    @Tonal Crow: I won’t bother, because really, even if true, how is that bad? They’re not UPPING THEIR ABORTION NUMBERS TO MAXIMIZE PROFIT year after year. They’re meeting the needs of their communities, which overwhelmingly are more interested in womens’ health than abortion as a “first solution”.

  213. 213
    General Stuck says:

    You all should know better than to let Scarlett get your goat. She positively revels in thread jacking attention. Ain’t that right Ms. lady O’Hara?

  214. 214
    The Moar You Know says:

    God I hope the “Raising Awareness”-centric charity scam industry falls to pieces over this.

    @Maus: You and me both. It is a disaster for disease treatment – “sexy” diseases and treatments get funding all out of proportion to the harm they cause, while “unsexy” diseases and treatments (like vaccination), which are usually far more harmful and serious, get zip.

  215. 215
    pragmatism says:

    @makewi: what you say you’re doing and what you are in effect doing don’t match up. you’re welcome for pointing this out.
    the answer to your question is no, you iz not rite.

  216. 216
    Tom Levenson says:

    @makewi: As of 2006, 35% or so of income came from clinical services. In that year 10,000,000 client visits occurred, with 3,140,000 unique individuals receiving services received services (not counting recipients of condom distribution). (That’s about 1% of the total US population, as it happens.)

    Of that total, almost 290,000 women received abortions — accounting for less than 10% of clients and less that 3% of total services delivered. As the 35% of revenue comes from clinical visits is drawn from the total pool of clients and services performed, I do not find your claim that 40% of total PP revenue comes from abortion to be remotely plausible.

    Facts do matter, you know.

    Edit: I should have realized that this thread can take care of itself.

  217. 217
    Maus says:

    @The Moar You Know: Worse still, “protecting our children from Vaccines” and all other sorts of pseudoscience are “sexy”.

    I can’t wait for Oprah and Ariana Huffington to throw the first star-studded “Morgellons’ relief” party, where we can find out what this season’s stars are wearing while having people with delusional parasitosis wheeled in front of the cameras.

  218. 218
    pragmatism says:

    @Maus: i practice my pass rush moves on those people. usually the swim move, but sometimes i throw in a spin move or rip through to mix it up.

  219. 219
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Tom Levenson:

    Depraved indifference to human life…in general …signifies that the perpetrator had an utter disregard for the potential damage to human life that their actions could cause.

    Na. There is a critical distinction between performing an “act” (as in firing a gun into the air, or in letting a driverless car roll down a hill, etc.) and refusing to perform one (as in refusing to allocate money). Unless there’s some special obligation (like that of a parent to ensure a child’s safety, or of an employer to ensure workplace safety), refusing to perform an act will not generally constitute “depraved indifference”.

    Also, your standard almost certainly violates the 1st Amendment association clause and the 5th Amendment takings clause by effectively requiring a donor who once makes a lifesaving donation to continue to do so indefinitely.

    [Note: This is halfassed blogging (at best), not legal advice. Ask your favorite lawyer for legal advice.]

  220. 220
    gelfling545 says:

    @balconesfault: But suppose your money had been given to you by other people for NO OTHER REASON that the prevention & cure of breast cancer? That you had said you would use it only for such?

  221. 221
    Mnemosyne says:

    @makewi:

    As it happens I’m not actually looking to control or restrict abortion. You’re welcome.

    No? ‘Cause I sure remember you crying a whole lot of crocodile tears about how Obamacare was going to force you to pay for abortions with your tax dollars.

    Maybe you should try to sell your bullshit somewhere that people don’t know you, because we have long memories over here.

  222. 222
    Tonal Crow says:

    @Maus: All good points, but “Veritas” put me in mind of demanding truthfulness from wingers.

  223. 223
    The Ithacan says:

    Veritas and chopper are the same person.
    The troll is feeding the troll

  224. 224
    opiejeanne says:

    @Tom Levenson: I like your use of “income” rather than “profit”, as some others were styilng it. PP doesn’t make a profit on abortions or any other services.

  225. 225
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Tonal Crow: You know, I’ll concede. It ain’t murder to make a choice not to provide life saving aid. It is hyperbole. Blog talk, not legal talk.

    Perhaps I should edit above, but there are days when I get to pissed to be as meticulous as I would like to be all the time.

    Murder no. Given what they say they’re about, depraved indifference yes. (In the street sense, not court.)

  226. 226
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Tonal Crow: For a further, weak-sauce response, note what I actually said in the post:

    And here I’ll drop the pretense of dispassion. The Komen Foundation’s decision links directly to illness, to death and loss and dreadful sorrow left behind. Those losses can’t be called manslaughter either, not as I see it. Preventable deaths that flow from lack of access to the standard of care are wholly predictable, even if the individual victims are not identifiable. Those blocking access through want of funds know—or should—what will happen. There’s nothing accidental about these outcomes.

    I do not actually say the word out loud — and the title can be read more than one way too.

    The implication is clear enough, I hope — and perhaps that much hyperbole might pass…

  227. 227

    I guess I need to pimp my troll filter again. Much more effective against total derailments than the pie filter, as it is in this case. Works in chrome too.

  228. 228
    Maus says:

    If I remember correctly, Jim Hightower noted in “There’s Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos” that the Komen Foundation was originally bankrolled by major chemical companies, so that they could vet all the ads…which is perhaps why the focus is on a “cure” and to some extent on “early detection”, with no mention of “not pouring such massive amounts of carcinogenic chlorine compounds into the air and water”. DanielCristofani 19:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

    I need citatations for this like whoa.

    It does make sense, considering the corporatist bent and ZERO interst in lobbying to reduce carcinogens.

  229. 229

    @Mnemosyne:

    To the true wingnut, women dying is a feature, not a bug. Yes, go nominate me for a Moore Award, but I’m standing by it. It’s not that they hate women in general — at least not to the point of murder — it’s that they hate hate *hate* liberals and any of their fellow travellers. Anyone defying their will by actually taking naughty baby-killing drugs is of course such a person.

    Now combine this Manichean absolutism with the observed behavior that virtually every utterance made and every vote cast, of movement conservatives is made out of sheer seething spite for liberals. It’s not really a surprise that seeing the object of their spite *dead* is, if not the intended outcome, at least one they’re not really considering to be a negative.

  230. 230
    Soonergrunt says:

    @makewi:

    At some point in order to come back to the reality that the majority of the world inhabits, you are going to have to admit that all that quacking might in fact represent a duck – and not, say Dick Cheney with a duck whistle lying in wait to shoot you in the face.

    But the latter is far more likely in the real world than the former.

  231. 231

    For a little fairness: It’s hard to actually rise above spite that sinks to the level of devaluing life. I will be happy when Rush Limbaugh dies. I don’t care about what this says about me, or does to my karma, I simply can’t lie and say that the world will be anything but better off. In fact, I hope he suffers.

    I can still ride my high horse by pointing out, however, that I’m not really willing to make innocent bystanders suffer and die for the sole purpose of spiting Rush Limbaugh. Republican lawmakers seem to revel in doing this even when the objects of their animus have been dead for decades.

  232. 232
    Maus says:

    This seems much less paranoid considering the extent of Pinkwashing and the context of corporatist/GOP ties.

    http://www.msmagazine.com/news.....sp?id=2732

    According to Jim Hightower’s new book “There’s Nothing in the Middle of the Road But Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos,” the chemical industry has been profiting from both manufacturing chemicals that have been linked to breast cancer, as well as making money from cancer treatments.
    Journalist Molly Ivins quoted Hightower in her Saturday column, saying “first they make money from the organochlorines that some say are linked to breast cancer; then they urge us all to go out and get mammograms to detect the cancer; then they make money trying to cure it. This is an entirely new kind of vertical monopoly.”
    Organochlorines are man-made chemicals often found in our environment and food, like dioxins, DDT, benzene and CFCs. Ivins cited a study at the Institute of Chemical Toxology at Wayne State University that found a combination of organochlorines caused breast cells to proliferate at a high rate. Breast cancer victims often have high levels of organochlorines in their bodies, and chemical and farm workers who have close contact with organochlorines have high rates of breast cancer. Israel recently reported a 30% drop in breast cancer rates after banning three cancer-causing pesticides.
    Breast Cancer Awareness Month was originally sponsored by Imperical Chemical Industries, manufacturers of organochlorines. They were found responsible for dumping toxic chemicals in the St. Lawrence River, and have been accused by the federal government of dumping DDT and PCBs into the L.A. and Long Beach harbors.

  233. 233
    chopper says:

    @Mark S.:

    now how much would you pay? for an abortion!

    funny thing is, you could make an anti-romney ad along those lines given that romneycare covered abortion with a $50 co-pay. ‘just 4 easy payments of 12.50! abortions for everyone!’

  234. 234
    iceskatingschnauzer says:

    @Mike in NC: Someone please post how to use the pie filter!

  235. 235
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @Soonergrunt:

    I just realized I have a few dozen sheets of address labels with pink ribbons on them that SGK has sent me at various times during funding appeals. I’ve used a few of them but there are plenty left. And although I’m not a regular Komen contributor by a long shot, I’ve participated in several Walks for the Cure, have pledged/donated to friends doing walks, etc.

    Anyhow, I’m packaging all the labels up in an envelope and returning them with a letter explaining why I will no longer be supporting SGK with my donations, time, energy, pledges, or purchases of pink ribbon products. And I love the idea of sending a gift to PP in Karen Handel’s honor.

  236. 236
    Jebediah says:

    @Veritas:

    Say we could determine sexual orientation in the womb, and my wife really doesn’t want to have a gay kid.

    Since when can a Fleshlight get pregnant?

  237. 237
    Hubris says:

    None dare call it murder because to do so would be incredibly fucking stupid. How many people did we all murder, I mean exercise depraved indifference toward–in street talk, natch–by buying a sandwich instead of giving to charity today? Rawls you ain’t.

  238. 238
    Tom Levenson says:

    @Hubris: No, but I actually took one class from Rawls; had him as my section instructor too.

    A very smart and thoughtful man. I am not him, but then again, most all of us are not.

    Oh, and by the way. Rusty pitchforks for you, also too.

  239. 239
    Diana says:

    “Seriously, there’s not even one feminist who thinks sex-selective abortion is a bad idea?”

    I don’t know what other people call feminism, but I call myself a feminist and I’ll tell you why any woman who asks for an abortion is entitled to one, even if she is asking because she believes in a bad idea: it’s her choice.

    It’s her body, and she entitled to believe in a bad idea if she wants to. Because she’s the one who’s going to be stuck with the kid, with her mother-in-law, with her husband, with her relatives, with her culture. She’s entitled to what she wants. It’s her life, and it’ll be her problem if she doesn’t produce sons. It’ll be her kid if she has to bear it, and chances are she’ll give any child she doesn’t want a pretty terrible childhood.

    Didn’t Freakonomics highlight a study that the crime rate went way down in every age cohort born after abortion became legal? That may not be a reality anyone wants to face, but it’s there.

  240. 240
    JR says:

    @Veritas: Veritas-cide is certainly a better answer to any of your questions. Evil right-wing wing nut!

    Every time I see your name in the comments, I know that evil small-minded ignorance is going to be in the very next sentence!

    Freedom implies the right to make less than optimal decisions sometimes. That’s just how it works. Sometimes people don’t go to class one day, and that means they flunk the class, because they missed the day when integration and differentiation are connected and the calculus becomes clear in one’s mind.

    That’s too bad for that student, but they are free, FREE I say, to make that decision.

  241. 241
    JR says:

    @just me:
    Thanks, I just set up $50/month. I’ve been wanting to help them for quite a while, and you made it easy!

  242. 242
    Samara Morgan says:

    @Amir Khalid: do you know what i find interesting/amusing?
    the more abortion/contraception services are denied to the poor and darkskinned, the sooner the demographic timer goes off.
    Veritas is oblivious to that. such a foo’.

    the only thing that matters any more is the demographics.
    if the GOP candidate cant get 65% of the white vote this time, Obama wins.
    In 2016 the GOP candidate will need an even more impossible 68-70% of the white vote.
    that means the GOP will be a rump party forever.

    Like Nate Silver says, demographics is destiny.

  243. 243

    […] among others, won awards for his work on television (e.g. NOVA), has a great blog (and also posts here), and is a professor of science writing at MIT.  In short, he’s a bright and interesting […]

  244. 244

    […] among others, won awards for his work on television (e.g. NOVA), has a great blog (and also posts here), and is a professor of science writing at MIT.  Should be […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] among others, won awards for his work on television (e.g. NOVA), has a great blog (and also posts here), and is a professor of science writing at MIT.  Should be […]

  2. […] among others, won awards for his work on television (e.g. NOVA), has a great blog (and also posts here), and is a professor of science writing at MIT.  In short, he’s a bright and interesting […]

Comments are closed.