Doubling Down on Brinker

2/3/2012

This video with one of my favorite senators, and indeed my senator, Barbara Boxer, arrived in my inbox this morning. Take a LOOK. I've included the senator's website with the video embedded, but you can pull out the YouTube if you wish.

Clearly, it doesn't show the entire Nancy Brinker part from the beginning, but it shows enough, and I heard enough from her yesterday on the radio, to know that I truly don't want to hear anymore from her today.

The push back was big enough that they are dialing back the story, their reasoning for halting the Planned Parenthood funding, and their definition of "political."

Let me summarize my feelings about this, feelings that have been shared all over the World Wide Web, and that is that poor women in America get screwed every day. And it infuriates me. Super uber wealthy Nancy B. can back pedal all she wants, but she makes my skin crawl.

Meantime, if you missed it, fave political writer Sarah Jones tells is like it is when she looks deep into the decision making involved in this latest debacle.

So tell me, is the apology and revision of their policy enough? Or is there more dirty dancing around the corner? Not sure. What say you?

fromthediagonal

2/3/2012 02:14:48 am

Laura, Brinker's so-called apology and rapidly announced revision of the revision of their misogynist policies is nothing but damage control to protect their own inflated salaries. While they may not have gotten away with the cancellation of the existing grant, I have no delusion that Planned Parenthood will be considered for another one as long as this group of regressives is at the helm of this outfit.

With friends like these, women do not need enemies.

V-A

2/3/2012 03:14:13 am

You must have read my mind. I HOPED you'd write about this. I haven't read Ms Jones take yet-- but my initial response to the apology was twofold. One, Brinker wants this out of the news and fast. What else is she hiding? How much of the 93 million is NOT going to research or cancer prevention of any kind? Has anyone seen numbers on how Komen spends its wealth? Two, GOD BLESS WOMEN. Somehow I want to believe that when women get riled, we get down. Even though I could have hugged Mayor Bloomberg for speaking publically about his contributions to PP.

daisydem

2/3/2012 09:47:52 am

Like I said last night, I love NYC and last night I loved Bloomberg. I too would like to hug his neck and how about Lance Armstrong today? We are women .. hear us roar but looks like we have some men at our back. Thanks guys!

Ottoline

2/3/2012 03:20:42 am

Good to know the detail from the Sara Jones piece, and thank you for posting it Laura.

My first impression upon their pulling funding from PP was: that's all I need to know. Not supporting Komen ever again, will increase my support of PP. End of my interest in Komen. There are other good groups that support cancer research.

My second impression was when I heard about the inflated salaries and too-high admin costs. Confirms my first impression.

My third impression for this interesting Sarah Jones info: ditto.

I say let's be vigilant re the "de-population" concept. To me, this is just a simple extension of the plan of our war-profiteer, low-taxed 1%: squeeze the 99% until their wheels fall off.

Ottoline

2/3/2012 03:30:13 am

In contrast to Brinker's salary (I've seen it stated as $450K/yr, and wiki says "over $.5M/yr"), let us consider Caroline Kennedy's fine work in fund-raising millions for the NYC schools. Her salary was $1/year. One dollar, in the fine old tradition of wealthy and far more ethical people of yore.

V-A

2/3/2012 03:31:14 am

Many many years ago I read an essay on how organizations like the American Cancer Society had a built in mechanism not to succeed in their mission. That they become so strong that their existence trumps ever finding a possible cure, like a living creature programed to live. That an organization that huge cannot chart a course best suited to killing it off. I wish I could remember where I read this shocking essay or who wrote it, but I've never thought the same about charity organizations ever since.

A few months ago, The Race for the Cure had a 3-day event in the park a block from my home. The massiveness of it, the pink tents (a dining hall!), the gift items I saw being loaded into participants' vans with slogans painted on them ("Ta-tas Forever!") made me remember that essay. All weekend I felt uncomfortable with the convention-like atmosphere and wondered how it truly related to breast cancer. I can still remember its formation,and how sober and intelligent Susan G Komen was, writing and speaking before her death.

Barbara Ehrenreich ("Nickel and Dimed") in her book "Bright-Sided: How Positive Thinking is Undermining America" writes eloquently about how the pink-ribbon women haunted her when she had breast cancer, and how swarmed like missionaries in their non-stop preaching to her on how best to face her cancer. They called on her in the hospital, at home. And didn't give up.

This has nothing to do with the political side of Komen, but it has to do with my own cynicism about their activities. If any of you have had good experiences with their "brand," I hope you'll speak up.

Ottoline

2/3/2012 03:51:17 am

Knowing who to trust: that is such a giant issue for me. And it's why I keep banging the drum to expose the Palin Hoax. It's clear we cannot trust most politicians. I do trust Boxer and Pelosi, and trust was a big part of my reason to support Obama. I trust Elizabeth Warren. Feinstein too. I will follow the guidance of those five, because they know more than we do.

No I don't trust those big charities, either.

I predict that soon we will see a scandal re PP, manufactured or real. Surely there are some real ones, as in every large organization. But nothing on the scale of what we have seen by looking closely at all the loose ends of the Hoax, the fundie right wing, and all the implications.

FrostyAK

2/3/2012 04:21:04 am

Time for people to get wise. If you have money to donate, donate to the end user.

Planned Parenthood is a very large organization, but they give RESULTS for the money taken in. Any organization that does none of the actual work is a fraud - a very lucrative fraud for those who run it.

Included in the frauds we can include any non-profit organization that has highly paid flunkies running it. That includes the national/parent org of local charities. Any charitable organization that is not in business to make itself obsolete is not to be trusted. That includes most of the national "research" orgs, like the American cancer society. Cures for cancer have been around for nearly a century, but have been politically, often criminally buried so that the fat cats that run the orgs can continue in their decadent lifestyles.

From experience, I include the national red cross. The locals were doing a great job for the people - until the national idiots arrived. Then there is Samaritan's purse... The middle class gives their money to support the exorbitant lives of the top dogs, not the poor who need the services.

Human society is sick, where's the org to cure it?

Molly

2/3/2012 04:27:48 am

to V-A

You may be thinking of a book by Downes, titled "Inside Bureaucracy," which is probably long out of print now.

Downes laid out a very compelling argument for why huge charity organizations over time become more about growing the bureaucracy than accomplishing the initial objective. When you think about it, the worst thing that could happen to Komen would be a cure for breast cancer, because then it would have to shift to another cause or go out of business.

This happened to the March of Dimes when polio vaccine became available. M of D tried to shift to birth defects, but never managed to get back to its previous heights. The trick is to latch onto a cause that has little chance of ever being cured or eliminated, one with strong emotional appeal, and one that you can continue to milk for years.

V-A

2/3/2012 04:48:10 am

Thank you, dear Molly! It's good to know I didn't imagine such a thing, and how grateful I am to you and Frosty for better articulating the idea itself. (Yes, I remember the March of Dimes analogy.) This blog has amazing resources. It's like rubbing a magic lantern, and the answer appears.

Laura Novak

2/3/2012 04:46:00 am

FromTheDiagonal and the rest of you: too little too late for something that has probably been stinky for some time. Yes, her apology and redirection is simply spin. Wouldn't have occurred otherwise, am I right? Personally, I go to Guidestar to see what charities are doing and how much they are spending on their top 5 people and their marketing. One of my favorite orgs right here in the Bay Area spends more than I'd like on mailings. Constant mailings. But perhaps the idea is that you might catch someone with a new buck to donate one time out of the ordinary. As for research and cures and these orgs, I agree with the theories espoused here. To cure it is to put many out of biz. And the further comments attributed to Brinker and/or the Komen org about not caring about ovarian cancer b/c it's hopeless, that turned my stomach. People probably felt that about breast cancer at some point. Like I said: poor women get screwed in this country. I think I'll write about Anne Romney one day soon. I've got some thoughts on that for sure.

2/3/2012 04:49:22 am

I agree with the comments here about not trusting the big 'disease' charities, especially ones where the top dogs make such outrageous salaries! I am more inclined to follow the recommendations of Dr. Mercola (http://cancer.mercola.com/) who stresses prevention via a healthy diet and exercise. He also talks about various cancer doctors who made successful discoveries, but were hounded out of business by the big cancer outfits (American Cancer Society) in partnership with our government (FDA). It is frightening and disheartening. So, I give my donations elsewhere. There are so many needs in the world today, it is easy to find ones where the donation actually makes a difference. Thank you Laura for posting the Sarah Jones article. She is one of my favorites.

pollyinak link

2/3/2012 08:21:50 am

This is a great website with more detail about the Komen Foundation, including their connections with fragrance companies that use known carcinogens.

http://butterbeliever.com/2011/10/22/i-will-not-be-pinkwashed-why-i-do-not-support-susan-g-komen-for-the-cure/

2/3/2012 09:03:20 am

Good link pollyinak. I have seen the Burzinski movie and I recommend it. http://www.burzynskimovie.com/ I actually see this whole Komen/Planned Parenthood debacle as a positive right now because of all the great discussion and awareness raising that has been occurring all over the internet.

paylin's failings

2/3/2012 05:04:40 am

Susan B Anthony List in the house at SJKomen!

Time to call Orkin!

www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/01/31/with-anti-choice-tea-partier-in-charge-komen-says-no-cure-planned-parenthood-cl-0

"Second, sitting on Komen's Advocacy Alliance Board is Jane Abraham, the General Chairman of the virulently anti-choice and anti-science Susan B. Anthony List and of its Political Action Committee. Among other involvements, Abraham helps direct the Nuturing Network, a global network of crisis pregnancy centers, organizations widely known for spreading ideology, misinformation and lies to women facing unintended pregnancy and to use both intimidation and coercion in the course of doing so. Also on the board of Nuturing Network is Maureen Scalia, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, no hero to women's rights and health."

SBA LIST = Palin

www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20005002-503544.html

"Sarah Palin said this morning that she understands why a woman "would be tempted" to have an abortion because of her experience with her son Trig.

Speaking at the Susan B. Anthony List Celebration of Life breakfast, Palin said that when she learned during her pregnancy that Trig would be born with Down syndrome."

9:59 AM

2/3/2012 05:13:53 am

I just watched the video with Senators Boxer and Murray. Excellent. I am a fan of both of these women. Laura, where are the quotes that Brinker/Komen don't care about ovarian cancer? I looked on the web, but could not find anything.

KarenJ

2/3/2012 05:40:25 am

One more nail in Brinker/Handel/Abraham's scam perpetrated on PP is this:

**I asked Komen board member John Raffaelli to respond to those who are now saying that the announcement doesn’t necessarily constitute a reversal until Planned Parenthood actually sees more funding. He insisted it would be unfair to expect the group to commit to future grants.

“It would be highly unfair to ask us to commit to any organization that doesn’t go through a grant process that shows that the money we raise is used to carry out our mission,” Raffaelli told me. “We’re a humanitarian organization. We have a mission. Tell me you can help carry out our mission and we will sit down at the table.”**

---------------

There's more at Greg Sargent's The Plum Line at the following link, and search for previous blog entries there, too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/komen-caved-or-did-it/2012/02/03/gIQA9tS9mQ_blog.html

lilly lily

2/3/2012 05:52:50 am

Christ Almighty. Palin is weighing in on this now with TRIG?

The idiot.

Nancy has small and mean eyes and one big mouth, if her pictures at Huffington are representative of what she looks like now.

She blew it. The pink ribbon is now totally trashed and worthless. Think Pink. I think not.

nswfm

2/3/2012 06:25:21 am

Can't tell you how pissed off I was when I initially heard this against PP. I have been pissed off at SGK for a while as every pink thing for the cure has just been a big marketing hype of bullshit. That's all we do in America anymore. Marketing, marketing and more marketing. I raised millions of dollars for charities when I was the GM of a firm in the late 80s/early 90s, but not through parties and events like the hyped up things that go on today. I think back then, there was a big scandal about the head of the United Way taking a $400K-ish salary back then...I agree with the people above--give the money to the end user charity or not. This was an article I read when it came out and think that this is a better way than the big self-serving corporate charities:
http://hmturnerfoundation.org/html/artsecond.html
""If you have lemons, make lemonade. If you have women, make Womenade."

Screw those blood sucking leeches.

Ottoline

2/3/2012 07:39:29 am

I am on a one-person crusade to call the two groups pro-choice and anti-choice. No one is anti-life, last time I looked. Unless you count people who withhold life-and-death services from the needy.

Isn't it a certainty that almost all reasonable people will now leave Komen, so we will be correct in assuming this becomes an all-RW fundie group. So that it isn't too embarrassing, some deep-pockets Koch-type guy will make up the difference. All the more reason to give Komen a wide berth henceforth.

I think Floyd is right, though, that these outrageous attn-getting assaults on women's rights and gay rights are intended to distract us from the even bigger issues of disappearing middle class, tax reform, stop the wars, re-build our infrastructure, deliver services, all of which the Repubs oppose in the most idiotic ways. So they are using hot-buttons like PP and gay rights to divide and distract us. They sure succeeded in the last election.

Laura Novak

2/3/2012 08:53:45 am

Lord, did SP just weigh in now again with the Trig thing? Okay, I'm back and having to catch up. Will read the links and respond. Thank you all for furthering the conversation.

I wish I could recall where I read the thing about the ovarian cancer. It was just since this broke wide open, so I know it was recent. If I can find the reference I will. I'm trying to find an Anne Romney video as well that keeps bugging me and I thought I'd saved.

The thing about the pink? I always wondered how that made people feel who were sick or dying of other types of cancer.

Banyan

2/3/2012 09:25:00 am

Ari Fleischer, former press-secretary to George Bush, has admittedly coordinated SGK's long-planned attempt to destroy Planned Parenthood. This attempt was closely coordinated with the bogus Repub investigation of PP in Congress.

Karen Handel, failed tea party candidate --who campaigned for Georgia Governor as a rabid right-to-lifer--and who was _strongly_ supported by Sarah Palin, is the person on the SGK board, who has become the public face of this disaster.

lisa

2/3/2012 09:32:33 am

I listened to that interview this morning and it wasn’t until the senators began speaking that anything made sense. Brinker was all over the map and used some fairly lame excuse regarding the reason to not consider PP in their "grant-funding rubric.” What the hell does this mean? I simply doubled my monthly contribution to PP and am encouraging my daughters to begin giving. They are in their 20s and it is time for them to step up to the plate to protect their uterus’ from idiots who wish make "biology is destiny” their rallying cry.

Ottoline

2/3/2012 09:45:46 am

Sure sounds like "Southern Strategy" to me (I just read the wiki summary of it, and it's well written): give Ari Fleischer a fee to advise how to get PP off the Komen list; Ari picks a rabid fundie to hire; rabid fundie does what Brinker wanted. Not what Brinker said today, but that's okay: We didn't believe her turnaround speech anyway, without even knowing why. Now we know why.

Laura Novak

2/3/2012 10:27:34 am

Thanks for the butter link. She did a great job with that breakdown. The 990s are featured in my novel as a matter of fact. It's a major way the main character and her posse get to the bottom of the financial malfeasance going on at the school. In real life, they are a wonderful window into the money being spent by not-for-profits.

I will go watch the movie now. Mercola (someone mentioned him earlier) has made interesting points about sunscreen and who that really benefits. I have often had my doubts there and I wear it as infrequently as I can. But then again, I am against aspartame and try never to ingest it, so there. But I am rambling...

Laura Novak

2/3/2012 10:29:58 am

Oh, and yes, I had read that earlier today about Ari F. Thanks for that, Banyan. Makes sense after all, doesn't it? (how many unwanted children do these nut-jobs adopt again? Remind me?)

And I'll add that Boxer has been a favorite of mine since my earlier reporting days in the 80s. She was always available and always ready and eager to talk and boy could she talk! Love her energy!!

2/3/2012 11:16:53 am

lots of great comments & articles to read through. Thanks.

To the original question: without a Koch, their donations will shrink significantly. I have a large group of friends I bonded with over our shared support of Komen. Some went on to be leaders of the local chapter. To a woman, we are all done with support for the organization.

My hope is that those politicians and organizations flirting with anti choice policies will stand up and take notice of this furor, and realize that there are many women who will fight for our rights.

Can't wait for the Anne Romney story. I've wondered about her, so clueless as to commiserate with the huddled masses because when Mitt was in b-school they were so poor they had to dip into their capital. The horror!

Ottoline

2/3/2012 12:08:25 pm

Up: could you tell us some detail re why you and your friends are done with Komen. I mean what would you have experienced at the local level? That would be a different (inside) view.

I too am interested in Anne Romney.

Remember when Hillary stepped down, and when SP was picked there were people speaking out in surprise that H supporters didn't flock to SP. After all, them wimmen, they're all alike in the dark, right? I think that profound cluelessness can be (and is) disguised but not really grasped and fixable in much of the GOP, esp not among Southern Strategy supporters.

(Love your use of the term "anti choice"!)

2/3/2012 11:43:44 pm

I wasn't very involved with the Komen staff, but generally the staff were very nice and supportive. Several of the women on my run team who had more contact with the staff went on to volunteer leadership positions with the chapter. One left and now works with grassroots organizations due to politics, but she is circumspect and has not shared details.

We came together because bc had touched our lives in some way, and we wanted to work for a cure and to support women and their families, to make their lives easier while they were undergoing treatment.

What I've heard from my friends echoes my feelings. Our primary interest is women's health, particularly for those who may have limited access to care. Komen has tipped their hand and shown their primary interests lie elsewhere. They are willing to sacrifice care for poor women for political or religious reasons.

Re the Fleischer story, this was going to be an issue (on either side) at some point. A good recruiter/screener should be asking those questions of candidates for a communications position. I can't get worked up about that.

As for salaries I have mixed feelings. I work for a nonprofit and know you can't always attract or retain top staff without paying something near market salaries. It is a potential area for abuse, but a necessary and good thing if appropriate controls and policies in place. $400,000 isn't outside reason for CEO of an organization the size of Komen.

Banyan

2/3/2012 11:57:14 am

Anne Romney apparently has/had a "secret" 3 Million dollar stash set up for her in a Swiss Bank (UBS) as "walkin' around money."

It was considered too "inconsequential" an amount for the Romneys to declare it on any previous financial disclosure forms, and was closed at the end of 2010 (while getting the accounts "cleaned up" for the presidential bid.)

grannyj

2/3/2012 12:08:27 pm

IM referenced an interesting article from the Globe and Mail. It's an interesting and disturbing read. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/movies/pinkwashing-and-the-dark-side-of-breast-cancer-philanthropy/article2324204/

Jeanabella

2/3/2012 08:50:27 pm

Great comments and info here, thanks Laura,
and I will add my experience with a non-profit.
For over 10 years, five of them on the Board of Directors, I worked with The Weber Foundation of Helping Hands. It was all volunteer and 100% of the proceeds we raised went to recipients.
The mission was to help people who are in dire need from a catastrophic incident in their lives, anything from a fire in their home to loosing income and children in need and sometimes someone suffering from a life altering disease, so not about one single disease or problem.
We also developed a sub fund "Helping Hands for Heroes" right after the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan and the funds collected were focused on vets of these wars and their families needs. Each month we met to decide who would be a recipient out of the many requests. The amount was also dependent on the situation.
Google the foundation to see all the good work done there.
The main thing for any foundation should be to use as much of the donations as possible for the purpose stated on the filings for non-profit status.
My experience is that this is a very strict process. All the administration costs were paid for by us, not taken from the donations. That's 100% of admin. paid by the founder and volunteers.
Komen is a not interested in a cure as they won't support research with more money even though they have it. The figure I researched was 17% of the proceeds go for research. Why would they want a cure? It would put them out of a very lucrative job that also gives them clout and prestige.
No one that I know wants to kill anything or anyone. No one is pro abortion, that's the talking point of right wing nuts.
pro-choice vs anti-choice makes sense.
btw, I'm up early on this Saturday because as I was listening to the radio in bed, I heard on NPR a rebroadcast of a show on Komen and the right wing had their talking heads on with false info and numbers, but thank goodness they also had some progressive thinkers with the real numbers, however, they were all missing the point. When a women who was catholic and in her 40's called, she made sense stating that if she cut off her finger, no one is concerned with her finger, but they are concerned with other parts of her body, it's "my body" no one else's.
Personhood bs was mentioned and how serious these people on the right are about a fetus being a person and a citizen!
Death comes after your last breath, as life comes with your first breath of air!
It's as simple as that to me.

@Jeanabella

Ottoline

2/3/2012 11:26:41 pm

Jeanabella -- what good info re your Weber group. What a blessing you are to the people you help in such a principled way. Thank you for telling us.

I have a different view on just one thing. There is no need to generate a one-size-fits-all view of life and death. To me, esp after my last experiences with death, it is beyond comprehension. Ditto life. But we human beans need to feel we understand, so we develop various working theories, to help us get on with it. That's probably good, in most cases. But the complexity and incomprehensibility of life and death are exactly the reasons why no one but the mother should make the choices post conception. Certainly not a govt (as in China for awhile) or anyone else (church, coercive others). This is how Pres Obama put it in a v moving speech, adding that in his experience there was not a single woman he knew who did not give this choice the most serious, extensive, careful thought. He sure had guts to address this -- it was before the election and gave me yet another reason to vote for him. Both his view and his courage to speak to it in this way.

sharon

2/3/2012 11:02:29 pm

Thank you for posting on this debacle Laura! I'm so angry right now.

I used PP as a teenager when I had nowhere to turn, no money, no support and scared to death. They helped me with birth control, exams, medical needs and I didn't have one dime to pay. When I think back on that time, I can't imagine how bad things could've turned out for me without the support of this wonderful organization.

To see the attacks on them today - it's outrageous. It's political. And it's unacceptable.

I will never, ever donate one penny to Komen - I will donate to PP.
The whole "pink" scam has been exposed and I suspect they will never regain their reputation. The money trail....not good.

I'm sick of these rightwing lunatics trying to take control of my body and my choices. Screw them. Any woman that doesn't feel outrage should think about the implications of these actions.

It's an all-out assault on women. "They" are trying to strip us of our right to choose - but it doesn't end there. They want to own us - control us - decide for us - it's sickening.

Ottoline

2/3/2012 11:53:52 pm

If fundies were to prevail, restricting women's rights, it would affect the poor, disproportionately. A woman with resources would still have avenues to get ALL her medical needs met, and workplace sexism does not hurt a weatlhy woman as much because she has financial security already. So once again, my thoughts turn to Southern Strategy and "de-population." And along with "de-population" comes the creation of the abjectly poor class that has been so convenient as a supply of cheap servants.

In the recently released Jackie audio, she mentions with outrage overhearing a conversation among the good ole boys about bringing the Cuban jailed and/or poor to Washington so they could work as very low-paid servants for those fat cat good ole boys. Low wage better than prison, they chortled. Jackie put that into her recording for a reason: it is not a random thing. She was so v intelligent and strategic in all she did. It is her voice from the grave (as she knew it would be) telling us to be wary of these retarded politicians.

Ottoline

2/4/2012 12:31:01 am

Hi Up: Thx for responding. I agree re market-value salaries for attracting the top people, but I don't see why Brinker herself was not a $1/year person. YOU and your friends volunteered, why shouldn't she?

In an effort to know the approx net worth of the Brinkers, see the last paragraph of this 1993 NYT article, which puts the Brinker stake in Chili's at $54M then. Their total wealth was surely more, even in 1993. Shame on greedy Ms Brinker. IMO.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/25/business/brinker-names-new-chief.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

2/4/2012 01:59:27 am

I totally agree with you Ottoline. She is using her sister's name, suffering, and illness for her own profit. She is shameful.

Ottoline

2/4/2012 02:44:35 am

OMG -- in looking at Brinker's photo, she reminded me of my lifelong GORGEOUS friend who I saw recently after about 15 yrs: I could not stop noticing the unfortunate things she had done to her face. Yes she looked young, and beautiful in this altered way -- but she was not herself, And I could not avoid that thought each time I looked at her. And here we see it on Nancy Brinker: how to go from a beautiful woman to a phony-looking woman. None of my business, of course. I guess that's why she needs the extra $450k/yr.

[IMG]http://i44.tinypic.com/2rxbozp.jpg[/IMG]
http://i44.tinypic.com/2rxbozp.jpg

Ottoline

2/4/2012 02:46:08 am

Ooops -- only the second link works,

Ottoline

2/4/2012 03:44:51 am

In case you have not chosen to develop eagle eyes for "work," here is what it looks to me she had done:

-- Ass fat injected into her cheeks (ok maybe some chemical filler)
-- Top-of-lip wrinkles filled in, giving a bad thickened look
-- Eyes pulled sideways a little
-- Plumping of lower lip
-- Hair dyed; prob has some grey now, which I would prefer
-- Look at her beautiful "before" teeth: uneven length, uneven alignment, but beautiful to my eye. The fakes are too even in color and shape, shrieking FAKE! fake! to me and absorbing my attention when I talk to someone sporting them.

Audrey Hepburn was willing to age normally. Caroline Kennedy's wrinkles (as she talks to Letterman in a long recent video) are just beautiful. Expressive, Character-laden. Echoes of her family. To my eye.

Nice suit on Komen, though, on the before, even if it is in the color that will be banished everywhere now, except in fundie-land.

V ictoria link

2/5/2012 02:39:47 am

They may have been good once, but now they're a scam. Not just political, but really not as useful as they could be.

Given how much PP has been bashed over the last few years, and how little pushback there has been, Komen must have thought they would get away with this. I'm so glad that the people rose up and shouted no.

I hope Komen withers away.

lilly-olily@hotmail.com

2/6/2012 06:07:23 am

Komens may not realize it yet. But they have lost an enormous amount of support.

Pink is now passe.

A woman in a blue robe has a video which is on Andrew Sullivans daily dish. She talks about breast cancer and all her proceedures and show the aftermath.(not for anyone who is squeamish). She says something to the effect that cancer lallows you speak the truth, and suggests that the Komen foundation can kiss her a**.

When they put God and their politics in the fore, I can see how anyone with an ounce of brains that isn't a fundi, finds THAT offensive.

Comments are closed.

Doubling Down on Brinker

Laura Novak

Blogs I Read

Categories

Archives