Exactly correct, Komen has violated the trust of their donors.

People gave to Komen because it was not a political organization. To regain our trust, they need to remove those that violated that trust from Karen Handel to various board members with agendas other than battling this horrific disease.

Their bullsh!t explanation of why they reversed course is as palitable and honest as their bullsh!t explanations for the original decision.

Houston, we have an honesty problem here!

That's exactly what blurted out of my mouth prompting both co-workers to exclaim "What?!!" Such a bullsh!t answer.

Someone hacked their facebook account, and where it says something like, "Helping 40,000 women a year!" they changed it to "running over 40,000 women on the way to the bank." something like that. They said yesterday on Andrea Mitchell that they were getting a very favorable response so far." I guess they found out what kind of a response they got. haha

Komen's become the latest accomplice to the right-wing's "High Tech Rape" of women. They're like the women who hold down other women during a clitorectomy.

I do not and cannot accept SKG founder Nancy Brinker's explanation, or apology. I've got over 20 years experience working for nonprofits handling gifts and grants (yes, there is a difference).

Money received by the nonprofit and designated for a specific purpose must be used for that purpose, and a nonprofit faces severe penalties for being unable to account for money received and for how that money was spent. Donations are not tossed into one giant account with no one tracking expenditures or uses of the money.

I cannot believe that SGK is unaware of this, nor do I believe it grants money to Planned Parenthood without restricting that money solely to breast cancer issues.

This was a political decision that came back to bite them in the behind. I will no longer support SGK, because it has destroyed my trust in the organization.

They're going to lay low until they see if they get a Rep Prez, and if they do it's bye-bye funding for good. That's why they worded the reversal the way they did. It gets the heat off for awhile, but you wait, if the Reps win, the money will be gone!

Bob said exactly what I was thinking. Their word isn't any good until they get rid of the people responsible for this decision. And their "apology" is worthless because the people are still there so there is no indication that they are sorry and mostly because the apology stated that politics had nothing to do with the decision in the first place, a blatant, bald-faced lie.

Nah, they'll come up with some lame excuse to get around that.

Interesting point/question!!

Of course not! Republicans LOVE to support people who have sex with young children!

No conflict there!!

This is a modest example of exercising the power we actually have when we back each other up and act together as one. Now let's defeat the right wing's sociopathic vision to foist its "full spectrum supremacy" on the rest of society. OBAMA/DEMS 2012!

Can't praise or repeat this sentiment often enough,. Blogs are not 'Sports Talk Radio.' We don't merely 'shout our words into the ether, hoping they will be heard by someone with power.' We have power ourselves -- and the SGK affair reminded us we do and how to use it.

Two points: We can't think this battle is 'won and over.' Not only is the SGK 'walk-back' as phony as many people here have pointed out, but Republicans are still trying to make the story about PP instead of about SGK, and we have to push back against that. (I will be including in another comment my own updated letter to the MLBPA pointing out the other problems that have come out about Komen -- if you follow my example, hit the 'anti-union' point harder than i felt free to do.)

Second: As a matter of effectiveness, we should 'watch our language' more carefully. For example, the word 'sociopathic' in the above note adds nothing to the point. But it forgets our aim is to convince people to join us, not merely to vent our feelings. In fact 'sociopathic' is an extreme term that might apply to the farthest reaches of the right wing -- but even if you disagree with me on this, consider the effect the term has on a Republican who is becoming more and more shaky about his or her party. Will he or she know you mean 'the leaders' or will they think you mean them -- and immediately be so offended at being called 'sociopaths' they don't hear a word you are saying.

(Personal illustrative example: my wife and I argue a lot, and frequently she will get me to agree to her position, then follow up with a personal remark that angers me so much that I don't just decide to ignore her point, I actually forget what it was.)

Just remember, you aren't talking to us -- meaning the liberals out there. We don't need convincing, just motivating. You are trying to reach people who can be convinced. Keeo that in mind when you review your post.

And my letter to the MLBPA:

<blockquote>When I wrote you on this before, all I was aware of was that SGK was a charity that ran events at ball parks, that it worked in the field of breast cancer, and that it had made a very unwise decision that deserved a protest letter.

Since then many other facts about SGK have come out that make me question even more the MLBPA's relationship with the organization. I'd like to pass some of them on. (And while I am not providing links -- many anti-spam programs automatically kick out letters with multiple links -- I will provide any of them on request. Note that I do not pass on the myth that Komen is involved with 'pink guns' which briefly surfaced. The guns do exist and use the same color pink, but they have no relation to Komen.)

First of all, I am reasonably sure that the MLBPA, like most of us, viewed SGK as an inherently non-political charity, devoted to it's field and nothing more. In fact, many of us assumed that the Planned Parenthood blunder was that, caused by their happening to employ someone who had been a Gubernatorial candidate in Georgia who had made opposition to PP part of her career -- and nothing more. But, in fact, SGK was founded by an ex-official high in the Bush Administration, its board has always been stacked with right-wing figures, and they have received major support from the Kock Brothers, the billionaires who are the major money-suppliers for many ultra-right wing (and, more relevant to the MLBPA, anti-union) causes.

They have made other 'political' moves as well, including having an article on their web site supporting the fallacious link between breast cancer and abortion -- it may have been taken down by now -- and cutting support to one University because they were researching fetal stem cells.

But other, non-political reasons came out as well. How many fans who but their souvenir pink hats know that SGK spends over a million dollars a year on suing or threatening other charities that use '...for the Cure" in their name. (As the founder of "Kites for the Cure" -- which involved lung cancer, not breast cancer -- explained, it wasn't so much the arrival of SGK's obviously high-priced lawyer on their doorstep that bothered them as much as needing to spend money they had raised exploring their legal options and position rather than using it for research.)

And I would suggest the MLBPA look into the division of the money in general between 'administrative costs,' 'informational services' and actual research. (And ask yourself -- and them -- how much of the informational services goes to 'informing' the public about SGK -- in short, self-advertising -- and how much goes to information about breast cancer.)

I'm sorry, but as a lifetime baseball fan -- and yes, a lifetime liberal -- I hope I have seen the last time MLBPA members appear swinging pink bats.</blockquote>

yes, and I caught the typos -- too late.

I give you a standing ovation both for your decision and your using their own words to state it.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Perfect!

beautifuly stated

Think about this ... if you donate $100 to Komen, only around 15% or $150 of it goes to their beneficiary organizations, like PPH. If you want to support PPH (or any other organization they support), and you make a $100 donation, then 100% of it goes to that organization.

In the course of this politically-motivated fiasco that Komen created for themselves, PPH was able to raise nearly the entire shortfall of Komen's cut in under 48 hours. For Komen to give $700k to PPH, they'd have to raise 6x that, or about $4.2 million.

Maybe it's time people started thinking more along the lines of directly supporting the organizations they believe in and less along the lines of supporting organizations like Komen that are simply "pass-thru entities" that eat up 85% of the monies they collect in order to support their own inefficient infrastructure?

I mean, if Komen thinks that "investigations" or "pass-thru" status (or whatever their latest excuse for their decision was) are significant reasons to cut funding for an organization, then why do we need them? They suck up 85% of the donations to sit around and ponder things like this without producing any benefits in their target markets.

"While Planned Parenthood will apparently be eligible for "future" grants, it's unclear what grants Planned Parenthood can expect to receive in the short term."

The short term isn't the only time period where funding to PPH is unclear. Nothing in this statement guarantees that PPH will actually receive funding in the future. It just means that Komen won't use the "political investigation" excuse for denying funding to them. Given the far right wing bent of Komen's management and board, they can (and probably would at the drop of a hat) use some other ridiculous excuse for eliminating funding to PPH.

Also, they should have changed that to any company that is found guilty in an investigation. Because just because they are investigated, does not mean they did anything wrong., You know, the old innocent until proven guilty? Corporations are people, my friends, so they can't be judged guilty until proven in an investigation. (see? We can use that one too!!)

This all reminds me of the New Coke debacle. I swore I would never buy Coke again, but they brought my Classic Coke back and after awhile I forgave them. I'll most likely do the same thing here.

But I will never really trust them again, just like I still don't trust Coke not to do it again

@Next: You should consider contributing directly to the recipients of grant money, including Planned Parenthood, or maybe another reputable organization such as Avon. Also, read what CJ in Atlanta, above, said. Makes so much sense. I don't trust SGK anymore, either, and would not lazily contribute to them at all again, unless I saw proof that it was not being run by pro-life, right-wing people.

What happened to me with the New Coke debacle was that I just stopped drinking soda completely and never started again.

As several people above suggested, give your money instead to the actual service providers and research institutions. It isn't hard to find out who is doing the REAL work in this area. You want 100% of your money going to early detection (as PPH provides with their screenings) and cures for the disease, not administrative costs.

This has been a good eye opener for people about how charities work. A little skepticism in this area is warranted and might lead to people asking more questions about how these organizations spend the contribution dollars they receive.

This is a corporation. They pay zero taxes. And they pay salaries that, for the upper-echelon of Management, are relatively high.

What non-profits do is invest in salaries, overhead, and marketing, and with some luck, they set aside 15%-20% to be used for their ostensible purposes. In other words, what most companies would generate in "profits" after taxes, non-profits use to support their causes.

Considering the huge number of volunteers they never pay, and the donations they collect to directly support their various activities, the people who ARE paid have pretty cushy incomes.

This is the equivalent of Romney's 14% taxes on his hundreds of millions of dollars of passive income. It's perfectly legal and within the tax laws. It's how things work.

I never really thought about how charities work, this is a eye opener for me. You're right that this is how things work, for now anyway. I think we will see some changes in both politics and policies in this country as more and more of us start to "open our eyes". TY for a great post.

I would venture that there are a lot of like minded people. Komen is heading for a big fall that will unfold over the next year when it cannot raise funds. The right wing VP may find herself out of job sooner than she thinks.

No, they should use this situation to increase their grant request. Komen may pay anything to help fix their image.

I totally agree - get triple the grant amount now.

so they will leave the 7.5 million to Penn state...which is under criminal investigation...but not conclusive...

Yes, because everyone know that Penn State University is any way responsible for Jerry Sandusky. That school does great things with research and should not be punished because of a couple of individuals. Way to take the focus away from Komen and their doings.

But by that same logic JM: the grant money that goes to Planned Parenthood isn't spent on abortions nor does it provide for abortion services. It's spent on providing breast screens and breast cancer treatment. That's all it goes towards (and both organizations state this). Punishing Planned Parenthood because of one policy it engages in doesn't make sense unless there was some ambiguity as to the direction of the PP funds. Since Komen openly states there is and was no ambiguity this means they are punishing PP for providing abortion services even though none of that is associated w/ Komen or vise versa. The same goes w/ Penn State. Donations to an otherwise awesome school doesn't mean that your organization is promoting or sponsoring the bad actions of one particular individual or one particular department.

@real arkie... I think conclusive investigation means that they wont withdraw funding for a political investigation unless it results in a judgment against the organization (I'm guessing to prevent another ACORN-style witch hunt).

I agree totally! There's an old saying...if it walks like a duck!

They have only agreed to honor current funding obligations and ALLOW Planned Parenthood to APPLY for further grants. We need to keep an eye on this - their statement in no way promised to continue funding to PP.

I agree. I learned more about them in three days than I ever was interested in knowing, and now I just don't care about them. They need to have people at the helm who are working for their organization, not with a political agenda of their own.

Thinking? You think they were thinking?

The right-wing-nuts aren't known for their ''thinking" abilities.

Agreed on the pressure from corporate sponsors. I think the social media furor had very little to do directly with their 'reversal'. Personally, I wrote to New Balance shoes, Pepperidge Farms, Self Magazine, Yoplait yogurt, and Ford Motor company. It's sponsors such as these that bring in the big money.

This week has been enlightening about Komen, however, in many more ways than their under-the-radar political activity. It's brought to light how little they actually spend on funding research, and just how much they pay their executives. I had blithely written check after check to them in the past. No more. I woke up.

Was thinking of texting Komen 10 bucks in support of their reversal but then going directly to Planned Parenthood would be even better but cant find the way.

Go to www.plannedparenthood.org and follow the link to donate.

It's easy to donate directly to the Planned Parenthood Breast Health Fund. Click on the link below or just go to Plannedparenthood.com. I donated and it felt great to go directly to the service provider!

https://secure.ppaction.org/site/Donation2?df_id=3792&3792.donation=form1&bhf=true&s_src=BreastHealthFund_0212_c3_c3web&__utma=1.597123800.1328303154.1328303154.1328303154.1&__utmb=1.28.7.13283031

I'm thinking more like the PP folks saying "How we gonna spend this extra $650k windfall we just got".

Penn State University is not under investigation. Totally clueless post. PSU is a top research university and a few individuals are not going to ruin that.

Oh yes they are!

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7480766/penn-state-faculty-council-members-unhappy-independent-investigation-sexual-abuse-allegations

Komen stated they would not give grants to organizations under investigation.

With an organization like Penn State, it's important to compartmentalize the problems. Their science and medical departments aren't under investigation; the athletic department is.

It would be kind of silly to deny cancer research funding to people who are so far removed from any scandal that they couldn't see it with a high-powered telescope.

mpguy: ["It would be kind of silly to deny cancer research funding to people who are so far removed from any scandal that they couldn't see it with a high-powered telescope."]

Such as, for example, Planned Parenthood. After all, there is nothing scandalous about women's health, regardless of some witch hunts they're dealing with from a few partisan hacks in Congress.

At least Penn State does have a legitimate and very horrifying child rape scandal on their hands.

Apparently, the part of Penn State that Koman gives to is the Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center in Hershey, PA. I'll bet the Hershey people are upset about this.

SGK does not own the pink ribbon, do they? I think I just saw it on the Dr. Susan Love site (which has NO connection with Komen) and the Avon site also uses that same pink.

Avon and Dr. Love use pink, but not pink ribbons. SGK owns that, or think they do.

SGK should change their logo to pink flip-flops. Mitt Romney may want to invest in this as well, as a blind trust, of course.