NYT obliterates Komen Race for the Cure over Planned Parenthood stab in the back

Vicious editorial in tomorrow's NYT:

With its roster of corporate sponsors and the pink ribbons that lend a halo to almost any kind of product you can think of, the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation has a longstanding reputation as a staunch protector of women’s health. That reputation suffered a grievous, perhaps mortal, wound this week from the news that Komen, the world’s largest breast cancer organization, decided to betray that mission. It threw itself into the middle of one of America’s nastiest political battles, on the side of hard-right forces working to demonize Planned Parenthood and undermine women’s health and freedom.

In addition to harming women, the foundation has also tarnished, perhaps permanently, its brand, symbolized by the pink ribbon that adorns yogurt cups and running shoes and tote bags and Federal Premium Ammunition’s pink shotgun shells. Companies like Ford Motor, Dell and Yoplait may not find the same value in identifying themselves with the foundation after its sharp departure from political neutrality.

Read the rest of this post...

How to destroy a million dollar brand in 24 hours

Exhibit A: Nancy Brinker, founder and CEO of Susan G. Komen, the organization that runs the breast cancer Race for the Cure, is now spinning wildly, clearly in panic mode, on the front page of the organization's Web site.  Keep in mind as you watch the video that she's a George W. Bush political appointee and has donated nearly $200,000 to GOP candidates and the party.

I also get a chuckle out of the name of the video "Straight talk from Ambassador Nancy G. Brinker."  Yeah, straight talk is exactly what it is as Komen's senior vice president, Karen Handel, in addition to being a conservative Republican anti-abortion activist, is also a huge homophobe.

If Race for the Cure is going to survive, they need a new CEO and senior vice president, pronto. (h/t digby) Read the rest of this post...

Billionaire endorses near-billionaire for President

As expected, Donald Trump endorsed a Republican candidate for President today but not the one people had expected. The Trump nod has gone to Romney rather than Gingrich.

Maybe it isn't so surprising though. Not only are both men very rich, they both like firing people.

As points out, this deal is much better for Trump than for Romney. Trump protects his public image as a power to be reckoned with, a king maker in Republican circles. Romney gets to tie himself to a man whose public image is damaged, to say the least. The body language in the photographs says it all.

So why did Romney do it? My theory is that he dare not offend Trump by refusing him. Trump has suggested he might run as a third party candidate and he wouldn't need to take many votes to do a Ralph Nader on Romney. Even press speculation of a Trump run could hurt Romney.

Read the rest of this post...

Top Komen officials resign over Planned Parenthood brouhaha

HuffPost:

Dr. Kathy Plesser, a Manhattan radiologist on the medical advisory board of Susan G. Komen for the Cure's New York chapter, said she plans to resign from her position unless Komen reverses its decision to pull grant money from Planned Parenthood. "I’m a physician and my interest is women’s health, and I am disturbed by Komen’s decision because I am a very strong advocate for serving under-served women," Plesser told The Huffington Post. "Eliminating this funding will mean there’s no place for these women to go. Where are these women to go to have a mammography? Do they not deserve to have mammography?" With her decision, Plesser joins Komen's top public health official, Mollie Williams, and the executive director of Komen's Los Angeles County chapter, Deb Anthony, both of whom also resigned in protest.

Read the rest of this post...

62% of Californians support 'regulate marijuana like wine'

Why not? I keep waiting to hear a good reason why we shouldn't legalize marijuana and regulate it. With the economic crisis crushing the economy, now more than ever, it makes sense. I don't smoke pot these days but I'd rather be around laid back stoners rather than obnoxious drunks any day of the week.

The statewide poll of 800 likely voters conducted by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates found support for the initiative at 62%, with 35% opposed and 3% undecided. No cross-tabs have been made available. The poll found even higher levels of support for more general critiques of current drug laws and the level of attention California law enforcement pays to marijuana. Four out of five respondents (80%) agreed with the statement, “State and federal drug laws are outdated and have failed, therefore, we need to take a new approach that makes sense for today,” while 71% agreed that law enforcement spends too much, time, money, and resources enforcing marijuana laws. If RMLW were to pass, the California Legislative Analyst’s Office has projected “savings of potentially several tens of millions of dollars annually to state and local governments of the costs of incarcerating and supervising certain marijuana offenders,” as well as potentially generating “hundreds of millions of dollars in net additional tax revenues related to the production and sale of marijuana products.”

Read the rest of this post...

Santorum takes hard line against negotiating for drug prices

Sheesh, I knew he came from a family of pinkos but this is really too much. Other than corporate welfare for those least in need, it makes zero sense why the GOP and too many Democrats are so against negotiating drug prices. Negotiating quantity discounts is a basic part of the capitalist way, but they act as though it's dangerous. It's dangerous for consumers who are stuck funding the freeloading Big Pharma industry and that's about it.

Big Pharma always inflates their R&D numbers and they fail to admit that their problem is failing for decades to deliver significant new developments for patients. They dump a lot of R&D money into minor improvements and then expect everyone to accept the costs on those drugs and then help prop up the rest of the balance sheet with the bloated costs. Fortunately there are plenty in Washington who are only all too willing to play the game while slamming consumers.

Whose side is Rick Santorum on here? It's obviously not the side of benefiting consumers and regular voters. Santorum deserves criticism, but so does most of Washington, including the clowns that kept price negotiations out of Obama Care.

"People have no problem going out and buying an iPad for $900. But paying $200 for a drug they have a problem with -- that keeps you alive. Why? Because you've been conditioned in thinking health care is something you should get and not have to pay for. Drug companies, health care companies need to have a profitability, because if they don't, then how are we going to regulate costs? We're going to ration care," said Santorum. "And you may be someone who gets that care, but this little boy, because of his condition, or because of his life expectancy may not. Why? Because it's not cost effective." While some of in the audience applauded Santorum's tough stance against government involvement in drug prices, others protested. The mother of the child yelled out that she was going bankrupt just to pay for her child to keep breathing. It wasn't clear what the boy's condition was. "I hear these and sympathize with these very passionate cases," Santorum responded to the mother. "Look, I want your son and everybody to have the opportunity to stay alive on much-needed drugs. But the bottom line is, we have companies with the incentive to make those drugs. And if they don't have the incentive to make those drugs, your son won't be alive and lots of other people in this country won't be alive. We either believe in markets or we don't."

Soooo, how many iPads do families purchase each month? And again, Santorum is repeating the lie - courtesy of Big Pharma - that there will be no incentive for drug companies if they can't screw consumers. Someone needs to ask Santorum or anyone else in Washington why Europe negotiates and the US doesn't. Quite a few of the Big Pharma companies (Bayer, Novartis, GSK, Sanofi, Roche) are based in Europe and are doing fine. In fact, they love doing business in the US where they know they can charge about double the prices compared to Europe. Read the rest of this post...

Top Komen official hints she resigned over Planned Parenthood flap

It sure sounds like she's confirming that Komen bowed to political pressure when it cut off funding for Planned Parenthood clinic breast exams. From the Atlantic:

Mollie Williams, the Komen official who resigned to protest the organization's decision to de-fund Planned Parenthood, just sent me this statement, which I am reprinting in full:

Thank you for contacting me. As a public health professional, I must honor the confidentiality of my former employer, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, and for this reason, I 'm not responding to questions about Komen's decision to no longer fund Planned Parenthood.

However, anyone who knows me personally would tell you that I am an advocate for women's health. I have dedicated my career to fighting for the rights of the marginalized and underserved. And I believe it would be a mistake for any organization to bow to political pressure and compromise its mission.

Read the rest of this post...

Rupert Murdoch's UK flagship Times of London under police investigation

It's increasingly clear that the hacking problem runs much deeper than only one of Murdoch's newspapers. There is now even a report of his son deleting files from his computer related to the phone-hacking scandal, which suggests a much broader problem for Rupert Murdoch's News Corp that extends beyond phone-hacking. If the new allegations turn out to be accurate, there needs to be an investigation into Murdoch's US operations due to the links between the news organizations. NY Times:

The hacking scandal at Rupert Murdoch’s British newspapers took a new turn on Thursday when a lawmaker said police investigations had spread to the flagship Times of London. The revelation came a day after lawyers said an e-mail referring to “a nightmare scenario” of legal repercussions from widespread phone hacking at the News of the World tabloid was deleted from James Murdoch’s computer less than two weeks before the police opened investigations. Tom Watson, from the opposition Labour Party, who has been a central figure in the inquiries into phone hacking, said in a message on Twitter that Scotland Yard had “confirmed to me they are investigating” The Times “over e-mail hacking.” A spokesman for Scotland Yard, who spoke in return for anonymity under departmental rules, said officers investigating hacking were “in contact with Mr. Watson in relation to specific issues he wishes to raise” after he sent the police a letter on Jan. 23. But the spokesman declined to confirm specifically that The Times was under investigation.

Read the rest of this post...

Top "Race for the Cure" official, "lifelong conservative," publishes attack on pro-choicers

As you may know, yesterday Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the parent organization of the famous breast cancer "Race for the Cure," pulled hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding for breast exams for poor women at Planned Parenthood clinics, claiming it was in response to pressure from the Republicans in Congress.

But there's growing evidence that the life-saving breast exam funding, which presumably comes from the proceeds from the Race for the Cure, was killed in response to pressure from Republicans inside Komen itself.

Check out this tweet sent yesterday by Komen Senior Vice President, and self-proclaimed "Lifelong Conservative Republican," Karen Handel, who promised less than two years ago to kill funding for Planned Parenthood (several friends here in DC saw the tweet live before Handel apparently deleted it).  And while Handel is simply "retweeting" something another abortion critic said, it does the beg question why she retweeted it, and then deleted it, if she didn't agree with it:

In addition to the fact that Komen CEO Nancy Goodman Brinker is a huge Republican party donor, and former George W. Bush political appointee.  But it's worse than that.  Jeffrey Goldberg at The Atlantic is now reporting that three separate sources inside Komen allege that Komen's excuse for cutting off Planned Parenthood, that PPFA was under congressional investigation and Komen simply can't fund groups that are under investigation (who aren't the Republicans investigating?) , was concocted.

Komen, the marketing juggernaut that brought the world the ubiquitous pink ribbon campaign, says it cut-off Planned Parenthood because of a newly adopted foundation rule prohibiting it from funding any group that is under formal investigation by a government body. (Planned Parenthood is being investigated by Rep. Cliff Stearns, an anti-abortion Florida Republican, who says he is trying to learn if the group spent public money to provide abortions.)

But three sources with direct knowledge of the Komen decision-making process told me that the rule was adopted in order to create an excuse to cut-off Planned Parenthood. (Komen gives out grants to roughly 2,000 organizations, and the new "no-investigations" rule applies to only one so far.) The decision to create a rule that would cut funding to Planned Parenthood, according to these sources, was driven by the organization's new senior vice-president for public policy, Karen Handel, a former gubernatorial candidate from Georgia who is staunchly anti-abortion and who has said that since she is "pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood." (The Komen grants to Planned Parenthood did not pay for abortion or contraception services, only cancer detection, according to all parties involved.) I've tried to reach Handel for comment, and will update this post if I speak with her.

Another source directly involved with Komen's management activities told me that when the organization's leaders learned of the Stearns investigation, they saw an opportunity. "The cart came before the horse in this case," said the source, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity. "The rule was created to give the board of directors the excuse to stop the funding of Planned Parenthood. It was completely arbitrary. If they hadn't come up with this particular rule, they would have come up with something else in order to separate themselves from Planned Parenthood."

In other words, according to the Atlantic story, Komen didn't have to cut off PPFA because of the investigations. Rather, Komen was fishing for excuses to cut off Planned Parenthood anyway, so they adopted the rule about "no investigations" in order to justify, and provide a smokescreen, for killing poor women's breast exams via PPFA clinics.

Why would Komen do this? Why would they concoct some elaborate scheme to hide some ulterior motive for trying to hurt Planned Parenthood, regardless of the harm it might cause to poor women with breast cancer?  And how can anyone attend the Race for the Cure in the future, now that it's been alleged that it's being run, and used, a conservative Republican pro-life agenda? Read the rest of this post...

"Buffet Rule" introduced in Senate, but Congress more interested in "Romney Rule"

Congress is much more focused on maintaining what should be called the "Romney Rule," that allows the ultra-rich to hide money in Cayman and Switzerland while paying less taxes than Buffet's secretary.

By the way, isn't the "Romney Rule" supposed to exist so people like Mitt Romney reinvest and create new jobs, rather than sit back and collect income from his previous job? The only job creation Romney cares about is his ongoing, failed, attempts to get elected to office, going on twenty years nows.  CNBC:

If passed, it would require that anyone earning more than $1 million a year, including capital gains, would pay a minimum 30 percent federal tax rate.

The bill provides for a phase-in period for those making between $1 million and $2 million to "make sure that no taxpayer is ever in a situation where earning an additional dollar of income will increase his or her taxes by more than that dollar," according to Whitehouse.

Read the rest of this post...

Strict austerity damaging recovery in Greece

Ya don't say?

A leading architect of the austerity programme in Greece – one of the harshest ever seen in Europe – has admitted that its emphasis on fiscal consolidation has failed to work, and said economic recovery will only come if the crisis-hit country changes tack and focuses on structural reforms. Poul Thomsen, a senior International Monetary Fund official who oversees the organisation's mission in Greece, also insists that, contrary to popular belief, Athens has achieved a lot since the eruption of the debt crisis in December 2009. "We will have to slow down a little as far as fiscal adjustment is concerned and move faster – much faster – with the reforms needed to modernise the economy," he told the Greek daily Kathimerini, adding that the policy shift would be "reflected" in the conditions foreign lenders attached to a new rescue programme for Athens.

Read the rest of this post...