"He's in Orbit!" - Celebrating the Flight of Friendship 7
On Feb. 20, 1962 at 9:47 am EST, Glenn launched from Cape Canaveral's Launch Complex 14 to become
the first American to orbit the Earth. In this image, Glenn enters his Friendship 7 capsule with assistance
from technicians to begin his historic flight. Image NASA
That took some real guts... two out of the first five flights failed.
Flight number six, with Glenn on board, followed after the successful fifth flight, which put Enos, the first American Chimpanzee to go orbital into orbit.
Which kind of puts things into perspective, the first pilots in space were, on a very real level, subject to a rather "experimental approach", with all the real risks that came with it.
Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/John Glenn, First American To Orbit Earth, Feted 50 Years After NASA's Friendship 7 Mission
<>
Oh, the irony! Do you even realize that you are posting your question (what have we gained from space?) using microchip technology that was originally developed and refined for the space program?
I agree that private enterprise should step in at various points along the way - that was always the plan. However, we still need NASA to lead the way, and we need government funding for the research and implementation to keep pushing the boundaries. If we don't, other countries will. They're doing it already, and we're beginning to fall behind. This also means that the talent needed to fill all those jobs - in both the public and private-sectors - will come from other countries in the future, and those jobs will be created in those other countries, not the US. It's not just Russia - China is embarking on an ambitious moon-landing project of their own. Switzerland is working on "janitor satellites" to clean up their own space junk, with plans to sell that technology to other countries eventually. Many other countries are ramping up their space capabilities at the same time that we're cutting ours.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where this is leading.
Read the article CNET/Glenn worries the U.S. is ceding its space leadership
<>
I would wholeheartedly disagree with your assertion that we cede our place in the space race.
The US has ceded many manufacturing sectors to the Chinese, along with moving slowly into a 2nd place position with regard to technology development. R&D, and manufacturing for space exploration and commercialization creates very high paying jobs as well as a demand and requirement for better education among our young, I would much rather keep up our spending to create these types of skilled decent paying jobs than the service sector jobs that seem to be the current future of American employment.
The space race, as well as the Cold War, led to the development of many new technologies and ideas, as well as the huge manufacturing base this country ONCE had. Either we redouble our efforts to regain that position in high tech development and manufacturing, or we quickly become a 2nd class country sitting on the curb. We still TALK as if we should be the #1 country on this planet, as if we still have the same clout as we did in the 1940's and 50's, but more and more we sound like the French who still think they are a great power and significant player because of the achievements of Napoleon Bonaparte a century and a half before.
Read the article CNET/Glenn worries the U.S. is ceding its space leadership
<>
Two of my heros had things in common; they were members of the greatest generation, served on Shore Patrol and neither liked it, were Democrats, but most of all they were devoted to their wives. My father was my first hero and John Glenn was the other.
In 1999 President Clinton appointed me to the National Commission for Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. The Commission was known as the Glenn Commission, since John Glenn was chair.
In the year the Commission deliberated, it was obvious that the word "hero" had another dimension. With subtle but obvious energy, Senator Glenn was able to bring together a group of 36 bright, but diversely opinionated Americans, who agreed that our country was in great need of retaining, and recruiting teachers of mathematics and science. The word hero creates images of courage under fire or of life risking ventures. But it also can mean the quiet leadership to make hard choices. John Glenn, by dint of his work ethics and knowledge, was the hero the Commission needed.
Previous comments have mentioned Annie Glenn, who attended each session of the Commission's meetings. It was at those times that Senator Glenn was a hero of another sort. To see the mutual respect and affection that John and Annie Glenn had for each other was perhaps my most vivid memory of serving on the Commission.
Congratulations and God Speed!
Jeffrey Himmelstein
National Commission for Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
50 Years Later, Celebrating John Glenn’s Feat
<>
The Right Stuff and the real stuff.
It's good to be reminded that we as a nation could be united, and that sometimes, good men really do capture out attention.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
50 Years Later, Celebrating John Glenn’s Feat
<>
Tom Wolfe was correct in his assertion that John Glenn was the last true American hero. Somewhere in a storage unit stuffed away with all of my childhood memories is a record of that historic space flight narrated by the one and only Walter Cronkite.
For those of us that came of age during those heady years of the American space program, Glenn represented everything that was right in our little corner of the universe. Space flight was an event where teachers would wheel televisions into the classrooms and we would pull the shades and watch the grainy images of man's first feeble steps into the beyond.
In the basement of our suburban home, my brother and I crafted our own space capsule out of an old cardboard box lined with aluminium foil secreted out of my mother's kitchen. Lying flat on our backs with our knees up over milk crates, we'd play the record and pretend that we too were circling the earth.
In a world that has become cynical and seemingly bored with the space, it has become easy to forget the race that changed mankind forever and linked him to the stars from which he came. God bless the heros.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
50 Years Later, Celebrating John Glenn’s Feat
<>
John Glenn was my first real live hero. Abe Lincoln, Hector of Troy, the Greek Gods, were heroes of imagination that as a young boy of nine, I read about with awe and wonder. But John Glenn, he was real. And from Ohio! Because of his orbital flight, and his hero's welcome amidst the ticker tape shower of affection in NYC, I took to making my first scrapbook. It was truly a different era and an innocent age. Despite what the Russians were doing, in my mind, it was John Glenn and the Mercury Astronauts who made the impossible possible. Their spirit, courage, and humble strength was intoxicating to a young boy in 1962.
Yet, I disagree with the premise that we live in time short of heroes. Everyday, men and women reach out to assist others in education, medicine, military service and community activism. The work they do is heroic. It often passes by with stealth-like quiet, because these individuals are not self-promoters or celebrity players on the political or entertainment scene. They are what RFK once described as "ripples of hope." Few, of those ripples reach Washington today, and when they do, they are attacked by pundits on the left and right in both politics and in the media. Even fewer are able to seek first to understand, before being understood and to strive first to serve before being served. These heroes, like John Glenn, heeded JFK's inaugural challenge to . . . . 'ask what you can do for your country."
Thank You, and God Speed John Glenn.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
50 Years Later, Celebrating John Glenn’s Feat
Sen. John Glenn and Kennedy Space Center Director Bob Cabana reminisce inside the flight deck of space shuttle
Discovery in the Kennedy Space Center's Orbiter Processing Facility-1. Glenn flew on Discovery as a mission specialist in 1998 and Cabana served as pilot for Discovery during a mission in 1990 and another in 1992 NASA
The President and the Bishops: Walking a Fine Line
President Barack Obama Photo: Pete Souza/White House
Sounds like a reasonable compromise to me, using the sort of moderate logic that I imagined when I voted for Obama in the first place. I disagree deeply with the Catholic Church's desire to marginalize women, but I'm also uncomfortable forcing them to buy contraceptives, especially if they've demonstrated over hundreds of years that the non-use of contraceptives is important to the institution of their faith (However, even that's becoming less clear). Nonetheless, making contraceptives widely available benefits everyone, not just the families/women who use them. The provision of such a public good is rightly in the hands of the government. If the administration has to adjust its strategy to provide such a public good through insurers, rather than religious institutions themselves, so be it. In the end we all pay for it with our taxes. If not the churches themselves, individuals members of the church still pay taxes...
Read the article NPR/White House Details Changes To Controversial Contraception Rule
<>
The President will not gain an inch of ground, or respect, from his enemies for this and he will lose the respect and admiration of many women who have supported him in spite of many such capitulations. It is doubtful that the celibate men in funny hats will even accept this (money is “fungible” you know). Where is the “outcry” other than from Catholic leadership--who despise the President already?
They are--just maybe--using yet another wedge issue to promote divisiveness and diminish the rights of the rest of us (women anyway) to pursue our own beliefs that families should be planned--whether or not we have the money to afford the pills.
After all the horrific abuse perpetrated by this church, why do they continue to carry so much clout? I know that other churches are involved, but it is the bishops who are leading this outcry. I cannot think of a time that the right EVER responded to outrage from the left and while I admire and understand the need for compromise, it needs to be a two-way street.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
Obama Plans Shift in Birth Control Fight, Aides Say
<>
I still don't understand this - if one does not believe in the use of birth control, then simply do not use it. An individual has every right to do whatever he or she pleases with his or her own body. DO NOT, however, attempt to force religious beliefs on the rest of the country, especially when this safe technology has been used for decades to prevent unwanted births. If we allow freedom of religion, those practicing religion must also be respectful of those who do not (or practice to a lesser extent) and respect my choice to treat my body the way that I want to treat it. I do not understand how this discussion has even progressed this far...
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
Obama Plans Shift in Birth Control Fight, Aides Say
<>
Speaking as a former devout Catholic and someone who spent 5 years of his life in the seminary, when are the Bishops going to realize that they have lost the moral authority to lead with absolute power? Their history of looking the other way in the face of known and repeated sexual predators among their clerical ranks has violated the prime teaching of Christ, which is above all "charity". As quoted by one of the theologians in a recent comment in this paper, the will of God for his church comes from the combined wisdom of the laity, the church's theologians and its ecclesiatical ranks. And as seen in the actions of millions of its members, most of them believe that oral contraceptives are okay in the eyes of their God.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
Bishops Were Prepared for Battle Over Birth Control Coverage
<>
How many of the commenters here are practicing Catholics? Not many, I'd guess. It may come as a surprise to you that many people love their church for the solace it supplies in times of need, for the ideals of human dignity that it asks us to aspire to, for the comfort and joy of its family traditions that help give life meaning.
How many even know why the Catholic Church considers contraception wrong? Those who hate the church like to parrot platitudes like "the church hates women" or "the male hierarchy wants to control women and their bodies." Nothing could be further from the truth. Church teaching on the matter emphasizes the beauty and sacredness of human sexuality, and points out that artificial birth control removes much of the profundity of the act and can enable a mindset of immaturity and promiscuity in both men and women, a refusal to take on the real responsibilities of life, a refusal to truly love. These may be hard things for us to hear these days, when for us the pursuit of pleasure and material gain are uppermost in our minds.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
Bishops Were Prepared for Battle Over Birth Control Coverage
<>
Please, please do not make such broad-stroke generalizations. I am a Christian evangelical pastor who vehemently opposes the opposition to this justified provision. This has nothing to do with religion; it has to do with money, money, money and political power, which the CC weilds with glee. Even the Morning Joe folks fawned over and did obesience to the Catholic bishop who came on their show to lie to the audience. They all, most of them Catholics themselves, fawned and deferred and never for a moment challenged the lying bishop.
Now, on the other point, the Religious Right, as you call them are, like the Catholic church, NOT genuine religion but a cultural kind of religiosity that poses as religion for the purposes of their own hatred [which hatred proves they are not really Christians at all, but posers.] There are many conservative evangelicals out here that are, one, NOT Republicans, and, two, are not against contraception. I just beg you not to write us all off because of the horrid stain that the "Christian" right has put on just about everything.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
Bishops Were Prepared for Battle Over Birth Control Coverage
<>
Just reading a few of the comments, seems like (as usual) the hypocrisy is overwhelming. If there's a group that has a set of standards by which they live and (with no dictatorial power over others) that you disagree with, you bash them. Then, if there's a group that tells people what to do (with the full force of the federal govt. behind them) that you agree with you applaud them. Make sense? No...unless you are so full of yourself that you will impose your belief system on others. Put yourself in the Catholics shoes...do you want to be told what to do? I didn't think so.
Read the article NPR/White House Details Changes To Controversial Contraception Rule
<>
Schools and hospitals are NOT churches. The problem with all of this is that
churches have extended into traditionally secular businesses. What are we
supposed to do when the Catholic church decides to open a chain of non-profit
hotdog stands?
They compete with the traditional for-profit hotdog stand
who needs a markup on pricing, pushing out the for-profits. So they gain
traction/acceptance, and people need jobs, so they take them, yet they come with
all these types of exceptions/exclusions forced on seculars... Is this really
where we want to head as a nation? Do we do the same thing for all religions
entering into traditionally secular provinces?
Think about what you are
really clamoring for here...
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Compromise on Contraceptives Expected
<>
I'm not endorsing what Obama did. Far from it... it's classic "we know what's
better" liberal arrogance. However... Birth control is cheaper than paying for
pregnancies, deliveries, and family plans with more kids.
This was never
about money. It was about federal intrusion in our private lives. It was about
forcing Person A to pay for a service used by Person B when Person A finds that
service morally objectionable.
In the shell game being played to appease
all parties, it's quite possible that someone's going to be taking on a greater
share of the costs while another will benefit from the savings. In that regard
you are correct.
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Compromise on Contraceptives Expected
<>
If the "compromise" is that health insurers will provide the coverage for "free"
it is completely illusory. Insurers won't assume the cost, whether or not the
employer is self-insured. Every penny will be passed along--directly or
indirectly--to all employers, including Catholic educational and health care
institutions.
The fundamental underpinning that contraceptives should be
free is, itself, tenuous. Why then are not all of the many truly life sustaining
prescriptions, from blood pressure medication to diabetes drugs, also free?
Logic and fairness have no place in an Administration that seems guided solely
by self-interest and the impact on re-relection.
We have a President who
knowingly ignored the Establishment Clause because he felt it was politically
expedient, and who did so after promising he would not. Just another in a long
line of broken promises. This week alone he's got this contraceptive
"compromise" and his 180 on super-Pacs. Somewhere in the White House there must
be a sense of integrity and values, but I sure haven't seen it yet.
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Compromise on Contraceptives Expected
<>
Just in case anyone needs a reminder. The 1st Amendment of the US Constitution
states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and
to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
This is not even
a close call. For this administration established law and the Constitution are
inconvenient, and it is therefore OK to ignore them. This is the pattern and
modus operandi with this guy. This is not about birth control or even abortion,
this is about protecting and defending the Constitution.
I am not a
Catholic, and have no problem with birth control. If we allow this line to be
crossed it is only a matter of time before they come after your Constitutional
rights.
Election 2012: Rick Santorum's "Wow!" Moment
Rick Santorum speaking to students at Valley High School in West Des Moines, Iowa.
Photo: Gage Skidmore/Wikipedia
Wow, that was unexpected. It just goes to show how fickle the voters can be with lukewarm candidates as front runners. I think it may be more the impact of many people individually voting for an anti-Romney/anti-Gingrinch than a real base of support for Santorum though.
The Democrats would love to have Santorum gain momentum. He polls the weakest of any of the four in a White House race. He is a likeable guy, but the majority of the voters are not as pro-life, anti-gay, and ultra conservative as he is and he simply will not be appealing enough to moderates and swing voters to have any real chance.
This is a very tough year for the GOP. They have to go extreme way to the right of right to win the primaries, and then have to swing way back somewhere right of center to have a shot in the general election. That flip-flop is a hard thing to do without being seen as phony who can’t be trusted to do anything but lie to fit the audience.
One thing I’ll give Santorum credit for is he would hold true to his values and wouldn’t move too far left at all compared to Romney or Gingrich who would do total makeovers.
Read the article REUTERS/Santorum claims momentum with wins in three states
<>
Rick is a good guy who is not ready to be President. He lost his last election in PA for good reason and he forgets to discuss how badly he did in that election. He is also too conservative to get the Independent vote which is much needed if Obama is going to be voted out of office. Republicans need to face the fact that Mitt can beat Obama instead of voting for each non Romney candidate only to find out that they bit the dust. Gone is Cain, gone is Michelle, gone is Newt and now instead of voting for a guy who can win there are some who would vote for a young man like Rick who cannot and will not win against Obama.
Read the article REUTERS/Santorum claims momentum with wins in three states
<>
I wouldn’t rule out as others do, Santorum’s ability to take on Obama. His message will appeal to Hillary’s “clinging to guns and bible crowd” in Rust Belt States like Pennsylvania (yes, I know he lost by 18 % to Bob Casey, who ran as a Pro-Life Catholic Democrat which Obama isn’t) but these are different times. He also would appeal to Reagan Democrats in Ohio, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin.
If Santorum were to select someone like Rubio, Martinez, (Gov. New Mexico), or Sandoval (Gov. Nevada), that would cut deeply into the Hispanic Democrat base (just as many African-Americans voted for Obama to be the first Black President…I believe many Hispanics would feel the same way about the first Hispanic on a national ticket) especially in the swing states in Florida and the Southwest. If I were Obama, I’d be more than just a little worried right now!
Read the article REUTERS/Santorum claims momentum with wins in three states
<>
Let's all calm down now folks. This was just a blip in the inevitable march of Mitt to the nomination. Move along, move along, nothing to see here.
One has to wonder how much the mainstream media coronation of Mitt as the nominee had to do with these results. Not as a backlash, but just because so many people didn't feel it necessary to turn out to vote.
These were all non-binding contests, nothing really was at stake - why should I, the voter, spend my time turning out at a caucus or go to the polls when it's already been decided who the nominee will be?
So, the only folks who show up are the ones who are really committed to their candidate - and let's face it, not too many are really committed to Romney. What we have here is not the excitement of a well contested primary season. What we are watching is the dissolution of the Republican party - the business core of the party and the social reactionary wing can no longer cooperate. The Reagan coalition is dead.
Read the article DAILY BEAST/Santorum Sweeps Three Primaries
<>
I for one have found myself liking Mitt Romney more as I have seen him on the
campaign trail. I have come to dislike Newt more and more and also
Santorum---both come off to me as arrogant, wind-bag men. But the constant
sniping of republican anti-Mitts just takes us nowhere imho. I do not see how
people can advocate for guys like Newt and Santorum. Newt's poor campaign
organization and failure to get on ballots, scheduling snafus---and people think
he should run the country??? And Santorum has clearly failed to organize a
funding base and really sells himself as a know it all. Thinking that it is
somehow awful for a candidate to be organized and able to raise money is silly
and self-defeating (imho).
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Santorum Delivers a GOP Stunner
<>
Well somethings are never easy..........
If last night was a movie it
would be called ........"The Night of the Evangelicals"
MO was a straw
poll but a big Evangelical state........
MN........the buzz was Ron Paul
would win here but he got crushed by Santorum in Michele Bachman's state....
CO.........big upset of Mitt in James Dobson's state......
Very
tiny turnout numbers......
Santorum wins in MN with 21K votes........out
of a state of several million
Santorum wins in CO with 26K votes
.......out of a state of over five million.
Primaries are dangerous and
that the most Ideological voters tend to show up.
Short term this will
hurt Mitt some but probably Gingrich more. Maine comes in at the end of the week
and hopefully Mitt can end the week on a high note. Ron Paul is Mitt's threat
there.
Then a two and half week break before AZ and MI where Mitt should
get his Mitt...mentum back before Super Tuesday.
Will be interesting to
see how the polls move..........would expect Santorum to take away from Gingrich
now but how much is yet to be determined.
In the long run this could
help Romney.................
Stay tuned...............
Romney/Rubio.................."this is the team that beats Obama/Biden
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Santorum Delivers a GOP Stunner
<>
When you are dealing with non-binding beauty contests, of course the most
motivated Republicans are going to rule the roost, and those are the
conservatives. I am pleased that Santorum is putting pressure on Romney from the
conservative side, but I still think it's going to be Romney, and not Santorum.
One problem with Santorum is that while he has solid credentials as a social
conservative, he's not much of an economic conservative, and Romney may have him
beat in that category.
It's ironic that Santorum's ship has finally come
in, after it's too late to make anything of it. The conservatives have been
trashing Santorum for years due to the fact that he supported Specter. Now they
have come full circle, but it is too late.
Santorum is angling for the
VP spot, I think. If he can actually demonstrate an ability to corral
conservatives, then I think Romney will have no choice but to exploit that
opportunity by putting him on the ticket. In the meantime, Romney should be
thinking of other ways to appeal to the conservatives. But like Santorum's run,
I think it may be too late for that.
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Santorum Delivers a GOP Stunner
<>
Santorum did well this week, but he won't be able to take this to the
convention. Yesterday's contests gave him no delegates and were really realized
under special circumstances. First, Gingrich wasn't on the ballot in Missouri
and second, Santorum was aided by the fact that Gingrich and Romney put all
their resources into South Carolina and Florida. This allowed Santorum to focus
exclusively on Tuesday's caucuses and manufacture a little momentum. It won't
last and Romney will be the nominee. It may, however, weaken Romney in the long
run.
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Santorum Delivers a GOP Stunner
<>
Imagine our nation's future with Santorum at the helm. This is the man who said that President Obama's goal of raising the number of Americans with college degrees was "elitist." This in a world where competing industrialized nations are on a track to pass us in this important metric. Meanwhile, yesterday at the White House, President Obama hosted many of our nation's best and brightest at the annual Science Fair. He rightly praised their scholarship, their ingenuity and their curiosity. He also took the time to praise their mentors and their teachers. The very same teachers who are often described as "union thugs" by the republicans. The very same republicans who ally themselves with the creationists, fundamentalists and deniers who choose myth over scientific fact. Further, President Obama rightly pointed out that our place in the world of the future rests on the shoulders of the young and that our education system bears the responsibility to see that we are prepared for a better tomorrow. As the fortunes of the republican candidates rise and fall from state to state, as each takes his turn in the media spotlight, it is becoming crystal clear that the only sane option for America is another four years of Obama.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
In Santorum’s Sweep, Sign of G.O.P. Unease With Romney
Susan G. Komen: "We Want to Apologize..."
Read the statement: Susan G Komen: "We want to apologize..."
When I was in my mid 20's and didn't have health insurance (but had a job), I went to PP for my obgyn checkups. I'd look around the waiting area and see women of all ethnicities, of different ages. It was a place that provided valuable service to those who couldn't afford to go anywhere else. I'm way past the age of going to PP now, but I still donate to them every year as a way of giving thanks for when they took care of me.
Read the article NPR/Furor Erupts Over Susan G. Komen Halt Of Grants To Planned Parenthood
<>
It is human to sometimes be swayed, especially when the bullies are powerful. It is courageous to reverse a decision, especially when it will likely cause the organization to look foolish. Yay to them for standing up and admitting they made a mistake...if more people and organizations would admit when they are wrong it would change the world. Don't punish them for making a mistake, reward them for being strong enough to admit it and correct it.
Read the article CNN/Komen Foundation reverses funding decision of Planned Parenthood
<>
Too little, too late. SGK should have stayed true to what a non-profit organization means according to Internal Revenue Code, Section 501(c). Seems like they caved to the Christian right wing pressure and are now back peddling due to the outpouring of rage from people on all sides of the political spectrum. I will continue my support of the American Cancer Society and Stand Up 2 Cancer. SGK, you are off my list.
Read the article CNN/Komen Foundation reverses funding decision of Planned Parenthood
<>
Our work is not yet done. Now the Susan G. Komen Foundation should also back down on cutting off funding to institutions that perform stem cell research.
"In addition to pulling funds from Planned Parenthood for The Susan G. Komen Foundation also decided to stop funding embryonic stem cell research centers making it fully transparent the organization has evolved from non-political non-profit to a partisan advocacy organization.
That means the loss of $3.75 million to the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, $4.5 million to the University of Kansas Medical Center, $1 million to the U.S. National Cancer Institute, $1 million to the Society for Women’s Health Research, and $600,000 to Yale University. That’s a loss of nearly $12 million dollars in research money to eradicate breast cancer this year alone."
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Cancer Group Backs Down on Cutting Off Planned Parenthood
<>
Too little too late. I, for one, will never again wear a pink ribbon or support a Komen-sponsored event.
However, the unintended consequences of the Komen Board's politically motivated and cynical decision have been extraordinary. For the first time in years, the pro-choice, pro-women majority is making its voice heard loud and clear. And refusing to let the hardline anti-choice fringe drown it out. Let's hope that this new activism and this refusal to allow the anti-choice folks to define the agenda will continue in full force.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Cancer Group Backs Down on Cutting Off Planned Parenthood
<>
Komen is only backtracking due to significant pressure; they will not change their modus operandi. They will continue to challenge groups who use the phrase "for the cure"; they will continue to try and work deals with corporations to put the pink ribbon on their packing for money; they will be tone deaf to the outcries from advocates for their stupid marketing ideas; they will continue to hire people who are members of the religious right; there is no end to their "agenda" and it isn't pretty.
Here's hoping that Planned Parenthood will decide that they do not need Komen to do their work - they already have lots of support - new friends - and I hope they just move away from such a charlatan organization as Komen. Really - who DOES Komen think thy are fooling by their apology???
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Cancer Group Backs Down on Cutting Off Planned Parenthood
<>
Well I just want to disagree with most of you on here. As someone who has run many Susan G. Komen races and supported the charity I had no idea my money was going to Planned Parenthood. As a Christian and strong pro-lifer I am very much against PP. They talk young girls into abortion while there are numerous families going to china to adopt babies? And they have been accused of numerous corrupt financial activities. Komen is supposed to be for finding a cure not supporting other organizations that take the life of baby girls. There are health clinics in almost all cities and other charities to provide a mammography without going to an abortion clinic.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/Cancer Group Backs Down on Cutting Off Planned Parenthood
<>
They cannot put this genie back in the bottle. They have politicized and polarized thier little pink ribbons and they are now radioactive.
Truer words cannot be spoken about this fiasco. I don't care what Komen says, their pink ribbon products will never again occupy shelf space in my pantry or in the office commissary.
They have shown their true colours. Yellow.
Read the article NPR/In Reversal, Komen To Continue Funding Planned Parenthood
<>
Back peddling. It's fun isn't it? I'm not saying for a fact that their motives were political. I was once a HUGE supporter, but when they pulled they're funding for planned parent hood, it made my ears perk up. And regardless now of the apology and new policies, the research I have done of the foundation is very troubling and I am no longer a supporter. Damage done. I will find more intimate charities and ones that I can track their expenses. And make sure that motives aren't a result of profits.
Read the article NPR/In Reversal, Komen To Continue Funding Planned Parenthood
<>
If you look at their non-explanation it's obvious they pulled the funding for
political reasons. That's totally within their rights, but the result is that
poor women will have decreased access to breast cancer screenings. Planned
Parenthood serves many that simply can't get help elsewhere - going to another
clinic half-way across the city is not an option. This isn't about pro/anti
abortions - it's about breast cancer. Everyone on here talking about "thank
goodness!" ... thank goodness for what? A woman can still go get an abortion at
Planned Parenthood today or tomorrow. This doesn't change that... it simply
reduces access to free breast exams for poor women. Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Nonprofit Allies in Rift Over Funding
<>
Only 3 percent of Planned Parenthood's health services are related to abortion,
while they provide 750,000 breast exams every year. I understand people have
hesitations about where funding goes, but even the most exaggerated of estimates
as to what Komen funding could possibly be allocated for abortions (in my
opinion very low, as clearly it is not good for Planned Parenthood to lose high
profile grants such as these and they are aware of the issue) does not
correspond to Planned Parenthood's overall budget that overwhelmingly favors
prevention programs. Planned Parenthood has a legitimate breast health program;
Komen is a top breast cancer charity. To conjecture that Komen's grants would go
significantly towards abortions instead of these existing breast programs seems,
to me, bordering on the conspiracy range. For some maybe even a small amount of
dollars misguided toward abortions, done so in a deviation from Planned
Parenthood's otherwise Komen grant policy, are too much. If that is one's
personal belief, fine. But choosing to deprive thousands of disadvantaged women
of such a life-saving service is, to me, widely missing the bigger picture.
Read the article WALL STREET JOURNAL/Nonprofit Allies in Rift Over Funding
<>
What a ridiculous move based largely on politics.
"Komen says the key reason is that Planned Parenthood is under investigation in Congress — a probe launched by a conservative Republican who was urged to act by anti-abortion groups...it's the focus of an inquiry launched by Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla., seeking to determine whether public money was improperly spent on abortions."
Preposterous move by a respectable charity. The cruel irony is that the discontinued funding received by Planned Parenthood is directly affecting breast cancer screening - one tool highly supported by the Susan G. Komen charity.
Read the article NPR/Furor Erupts Over Susan G. Komen Halt Of Grants To Planned Parenthood
Planned Parenthood Supporters 2011/S.Mirk/Wikipedia
READ MORE TOP COMMENTS -- JANUARY 2012
<>
My uncle, in his mid 90s now, helped organize the Republican party in Denver in the mid 1950s. Long a fiscal conservative and social moderate, he laments what has happened to the party he always belonged to. He sadly noted that while he votes in local and state elections, he hasn't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since George H.W. Bush.
When I spoke with him last Sunday, I asked him what he thought about the candidates. His response: "The Circus is in town."
Read the article CNN/Santorum, the 'coulda, shoulda, woulda' candidate