Thanks.

I'll shed no tears if this in-your-face "charity" bites the dust.

it will be even more interesting to see if they dry up at SGK in the weeks and months to come.

Perfectly put.

K&R

What I should have added to that, is that if they were this really kick ass organization that was doing great things for women and breast cancer, today would be a sad day. Instead, hopefully, they may reevaluate the organization (and if the board has any brains, they'll fire Brinker and Handel) and make it into something worthwhile because I don't think there are enough anti-choicer's out there to support them in the manner they've become accustomed to.

Putting ribbons of any color on your car is a dumb idea, since it invites the opposition to trash your vehicle.

ditching the pink ribbons. I, for one, would never support one. I actually went out of my way in October not to buy anything pink.

it would have adversely affected sales for many corporations.

Whoever used to do their PR was quite good at it. SGK will never be able to pull off anything on that level again.

I liked this comment:

based on their new rules.

I doubt the foundation will completely crumble, but they will probably be taken over by right-leaning supporters. They certainly will no longer be seen as non-political, that's for sure.

k&r

I wonder how many people/sponsors are going to distance for the race for the cure this year. I know I'm out.

Good email. I think I will join you and send them a question through their site.

Wonder if any of the MSNBC peeps have picked up on that PSU thing from MJ yet.

(I'm just referring to the phrase "because some of us realize they provide services other than abortions&quot . To me providing abortions is a great service that doesn't need apologizing for. And, yes, they do other great work, as well. I just donated to them and it never felt better.

But there ARE some people out there that think that's all they do -- as educated people, we know better.

It's not because they provide other services. I wouldn't expect a cancer charity to fund their services if they ONLY provided abortions, so in that sense you are right - but my PO'dness about this issue comes from the importance of Planned Parenthood as a provider of last resort for so many women - particularly for abortions.

Planned Parenthood provides a much needed medical service that is increasingly under attack in this country. Ideologues and manipulative profiteering scumbags are trying to take this country backwards as fast as they can. As mentioned by another poster, to these sick f*cks 'The Handmaid's Tale' isn't fiction, it's a how-to manual.

There is another organization I donate to whose ONLY mission is to directly provide abortion funding to women who need abortions but can't afford them. I support them because ultimately, "choice" is no choice if it is financially out of reach.

I always had my doubts about Komen's value as a charity, so I never donated directly, but they will not see a dime from me even indirectly now, and if anyone asks why I will tell them. I am tired of self-righteous know-nothings valuing an embryo more than a woman's life.

But I agree with everything else you wrote.

I wouldn't expect a breast cancer charity to award grants for abortions, and PP is abundantly clear that no Komen money has gone for that. Dollar for dollar, every Komen grant has gone toward the identification and prevention of breast cancer (exams and mamograms).

It really diminishes what it happening with the funding to conflate the two issues, IMO.

No woman is going to go without a needed abortion because of Komen, but estimates are that 170,000 will not be able to receive the same breast check care due to the award being pulled. (Notwithstanding the money bomb the last day or so)

and I never contributed to the org. Even though I'm a woman. Something about the organization....I don't know...didn't seem ....I don't know what it was. Too commercial?

to get rid of Brinker or Handel and then learned they're all cut from the same cloth. I don't know if the rules are the same for non-profits but in public corps, if the stockholders are being harmed by someone within the company, they get canned. Why hasn't Brinker or whomever made this decision been canned? They've forever tarnished their brand, they're going to lose funds... maybe go 'out of business'. Doesn't make sense.

My guess is that the board is made up of business executives, and despite their ideology (or at least one would hope), they would have the sheer business sense to see what an unmitigated disaster this is. The well crafted/protected brand is toast. If this were Coke or Google, heads would have already rolled.

One has to think that the board members are already thinking along these lines, especially given the ham-fisted response from Brinker/Komen as opposed to damage control.

They didn't think people would really care or even notice, that's hubris. They didn't poll the issue before hand, that's hubris. Then to think they can repeatedly change their story and not have THAT damage the brand is just plain hubris. Suing other breast cancer orgs for using pink is hubris.

They're going to have to spend millions of dollars on a PR firm to help rebrand them at this point...

They're screwn but good and they've actually advanced the repub war on reproductive health. Hopefully, the backlash will let the repubs know we are not going to go without a fight.

the people who give their money to organizations such as komen (or pp) have pretty long memories.

and as far as trademarking "cure" (the stupedist thing i have heard since fox tried to claim "fair and balanced&quot what do these guys and their lawyers think of that:

and then be accused of making broad statements--DU is training me well.

Nice work, GOP!

k&R