Skip to main content

View Diary: Susan G. Komen for the Cure: More brand destruction (100 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If indeed this was "mission changing" (11+ / 0-)

    in order to choose conservative donors over pro-choice ones, it was a gross miscalculation. Because underlying support of SGK is concern for women's health — and conservative donors who are virulently anti-abortion to the point of deciding who to support based on this issue are NOT concerned with women's health. These is a donor based that is currently promoting rabid fear and hatred of women, and fighting breast cancer is unlikely to be high on their list of priorities, although they may not openly oppose it. (Or they may continue to lie and say they won't support fighting breast cancer because it's caused by abortion. These are exactly the people who buy into that fiction). My guess I that the donor base of SGK is 90% pro-choice or at least uninterested in a group which engages in the issue.

    I believe there IS no donor base on the right for a breast cancer charity. They'll have to change their mission away from breast cancer or anything pertaining to women's health entirely — or else become an anti-choice charity.

    Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07.

    by anastasia p on Sat Feb 04, 2012 at 10:10:39 AM PST

    •  I agree with you and think that (9+ / 0-)

      SGK made the decision to change both the mission and the image.  SGK tied the change in their criteria to defunding agencies "under investigation" for two reasons.  

      PP is the target of a House investigation and SGK believed it could defame PP and punish the organization at the same time.  The investigation is a BFD to the RWers, very much like the ACORN travesty.  It was prompted by a report by Americans United for Life, also a BFD.

      The investigation was begun in September (I believe) and required PP to supply years of records.  PP complied.  So far, the House committee has not found one single instance of federal funding going to abortion services, and IMO, won't.

      SGK believed this would be a slam dunk and pacify their RW sponsors, i.e., Koch.  SGK did not anticipate the backlash simply because the BOD and executives do, indeed, live in an echo chamber of their own making.

      When someone is impatient and says, "I haven't got all day," I always wonder, How can that be? How can you not have all day? George Carlin

      by msmacgyver on Sat Feb 04, 2012 at 10:27:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site