In the wake of the Komen fiasco, Daily Kos has now fixed its sights on another private charity — Paul’s Pantry of Green Bay, Wisconsin. The leftist website is hurling expletives and encouraging readers to go after the food program for allegedly refusing to send their truck to a Planned Parenthood location to pick up donated food.
Image credit: Corey Wilson, Green Bay Press-Gazette
Let’s shower this POS with our calls. I have left a message. So should all of you. Maybe this is a distraction, but much is at stake-a woman’s right to choose. And not to mention the poor and their hunger are being used as political chips by the callous right. Pro-life. Bullshit.
Paul’s Pantry refused our food donations collected by our area health center to help combat local hunger. This level of extremism impeding individual access to essential health care and now food is outrageous and must be stopped.
Ari Fleischer, former press secretary for George W. Bush and prominent right-wing pundit, was secretly involved in the Komen Foundation’s strategy regarding Planned Parenthood. Fleischer personally interviewed candidates for the position of “Senior Vice President for Communications and External Relations” at Komen last December. According to a source with first-hand knowledge, Fleischer drilled prospective candidates during their interviews on how they would handle the controversy about Komen’s relationship with Planned Parenthood.
Fleischer’s relationship with Komen and the Planned Parenthood controversy was previously undisclosed.
A slick move, to blame the other team for your side’s transgressions in order to deflect. Sources close to the Komen Foundation tell me Fleischer wasn’t involved in any way with Komen’s Planned Parenthood strategy. The person Komen did bring in to lead the effort is none other than Brendan Daly, Nancy Pelosi’s former press secretary, who is heading a team from Ogilvy PR. While Fleischer was assisting Komen CEO Nancy Brinker in finding a qualified PR person, Fleischer wasn’t directing decisions in the resulting Komen/Planned Parenthood debacle; it was Daly.
So Think Progress is accusing Ari Fleischer for Brendan Daly’s decisions. Don’t they have an editor fact-checking such things over there?
When the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure made a decision to sever its ties with America’s number one seller of abortions, Planned Parenthood, the media went to war. The media coverage was slanted in such a way that “mainstream” reporters like Andrea Mitchell and Lisa Myers of NBC News were openly advocating for a point of view—pressuring Komen to reverse course and give in to Planned Parenthood.
Why would the media go to war over something as seemingly insignificant as a policy change regarding funding at Komen, a private cancer charity? Part of the answer lies in the fact that, for the media, “women’s rights” take precedence over all other rights, including the rights of children. This is what “feminism” has become and this is what the Komen controversy was supposed to be about. In reality, it had nothing to do with breast cancer because the fact is that most Planned Parenthood affiliates don’t even provide mammograms. That money from Komen was used to refer women at risk of contracting the disease somewhere else.
So the issue was something else as well. While there were references to Planned Parenthood being an “abortion provider,” there was no explanation of what this “service” actually “provides”—a procedure that destroys a human life. This is why the annual March for Life against abortion is mostly ignored by the major media. It is a sad fact that even some conservative women still think that Planned Parenthood is simply an organization that provides information about voluntary family planning.
You saw very little in the mainstream media from pro-life people who supported Komen’s initial decision. The bias is so pronounced that the media long ago adopted the language of the Left. The term “pro-life” is never used. But “pro-choice” is. Newspapers use the term “abortion rights” to describe the political process of terminating the lives of the unborn, but use “anti-abortion” when referring to those of us who value human life. We are “against.” They are for “rights.”
So we made it a point to tune into the Big Three network newscasts on Friday night—hours after Nancy Brinker of Komen had caved. We wanted to see if this story would be treated in a neutral manner, or if the stories would be written from the standpoint that Brinker did the right thing—and, why did it take her so long? We did receive a shock, though it was a mild one. One of the three networks actually did a fairly nice job.
It was an onslaught of savvy PR tactics yesterday that brought the Susan G. Komen Foundation to its knees, apparently prompting the organization’s retreat today from its initial decision to cut its funding to Planned Parenthood. As Politico reported this morning:
On a day when the breast cancer charity’s top official made the rounds with the national media, insisting the organization’s decision to stop giving grants to Planned Parenthood wasn’t political, the firestorm only got worse. Top Democrats piled on; the head of the Komen chapter in Los Angeles quit; and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is giving a $250,000 matching gift to Planned Parenthood.
The Atlantic Wire reports that the Susan G. Komen foundation’s website was even hacked, for some period displaying a banner that had been changed from “help us get 26.2 or 13.1 miles closer to a world without breast cancer“ to read, “help us run over poor women on our way to the bank.” And the long repeated myth that the current Komen CEO takes home a half a million dollar salary was brought back to life yesterday – even though the truth is that Komen’s current CEO, Nancy Brinker, takes home $0 in annual salary.
But hey, breast cancer isn’t supposed to be political, right?
Officials with the Susan G. Komen foundation had insisted the initial decision was never political, that it was about providing more direct mammography screening services for women, according to Nancy Brinker, the charity’s founder and CEO. From Politico:
If you want a case of clear bias, the Washington D.C. affiliate of CBS will surely fill the bill for its bias against pro-life supporters. On January 23 the DC affiliate featured on its website a photo slide show of pictures taken at the March for Life rally held annually at the nation’s capitol. Curiously, though, there wasn’t a single photo of any pro-lifers. Instead, the photo essay featured only photos of abortion-supporting protesters who stood on the sidelines taunting the pro-life marchers.
The photo slide show initially featured seven photos of abortion supporters, such as one of marchers holding signs saying “Family Planning Saves Lives Worldwide,” one featuring women holding signs saying that abortion should be kept legal, and another showing a woman sporting an abortion on demand sticker.
Upwards of 50,000 pro-life supporters turned out in the DC cold to participate in the March for Life, yet apparently CBS could only find the small handful of pro-abortion supporters to photograph.
Pro-life advocates like Jill Stanek were incredulous, and it wasn’t long before the comments section on the CBS website exploded with pro-lifers crying foul. Dozens of unhappy commenters remarked how badly the bias of CBS galled them.
Finally, a day or so later, CBS altered its slide show and added some photos of some of the actual participants of the pro-life march. The slide show now features seven photos of pro-lifers and an equal amount of pro-abortion supporters.
Media outlets didn’t cover March For Life while it happened, despite knowing it was going to happen and hundreds of thousands of people there. News outlets do have stories on it now, but of course the number of people there are distorted and the stories are pretty bland. Again, remember how much effort went into Occupy Wall Street coverage. Reporters were at the scenes. News stations were always on them. Also if they had anyone on the scene at March For Life they’d have a more accurate number of people.
Photo Credit Michelle Fields from The Daily Caller
The best coverage belongs to Judge Andrew Napolitano on his show ”Freedom Watch” on FOX Business Network. Judge Napolitano is a fierce pro-life advocate and doesn’t shy away from the issue. At the end of every show he signs off with “The Plain Truth” and yesterday it was about abortion.
I then went to FOX News and I’ll admit, I was disappointed. The article was written by Shannon Bream and just like C-SPAN she called the protestors anti-abortion. Yes they are anti-abortion, but why doesn’t anyone ever call them pro-life? Why do they have to be constantly addressed as anti? When pro-choice protesters march they’re referred to as pro-choice, not anti-life. She did, however, give a reasonable estimate of people there, tens of thousands. Trust me, that’s much better than some of the others.
The March For Life took place yesterday in Washington, DC despite the cold, dreary weather. But unless you tuned into C-SPAN2 for a few hours this morning or EWTN (the Catholic station) all day you wouldn’t have known it happened. Other stations, including FOX News, glossed over this march while it happened.
Credit Elizabeth Avis @Beth_Avis
Before the march Michelle Malkin wrote a post about the media’s lack of attention. It got me interested and I decided to tune into DirecTV News Mix and the C-SPAN coverage all afternoon. Some people on Twitter, especially Sharon Cabana, helped me out by keeping an eye on CNN and MSNBC. There were a a few seconds of coverage on FOX News & MSNBC, but didn’t see anything on CNN. I’m not shocked, but it doesn’t mean I’m not disappointed. The Old Media was on hand to cover OWS at all times. They knew this was happening and yet no one on stand by. It’s awful how these peaceful, clean, and civilized people were completely ignored by the Old Media while the disgusting and uncivilized people of Occupy Wall Street received so much attention.
Thank goodness for social media like Twitter. Since I knew I wasn’t going to receive anything from the Old Media I knew I had to use the New Media. I reached out to people on the #MarchForLife hash tag and people have been tweeting me pictures. Here are a few:
Jezebel, the site where self-obsessed women celebrate unprotected promiscuity, is smearing another woman’s loss of child for politics. This, in the Claire’s Boutique mindset of progressive feminism, is called “empowerment.”
Let’s get down to brass tacks: Presidential candidate Rick Santorum, Personhood Pledge-signing, Griswold vs. Connecticut-opposing, Mr. Ban Abortion in All Circumstances With No Exception for the Life of the Mother, believes that the actions of his own wife should be treated as criminal. Why? Because, back in 1996, his wife had a procedure that resulted in the deliberate death of her fetus, even though it was a matter of saving her own life.
Karen Santorum’s difficult pregnancy and resultant life-saving, induced early delivery is nosecret; in a 2004 interview with NPR’s Terry Gross, her husband characterized the 1996 procedure as a harrowing but necessary. Karen, in her 19th week of pregnancy, received a risky surgery to save a pregnancy that doctors thought had little chance of survival. After the surgery, she came down with an infection, and doctors told Rick that unless the source of the infection — the fetus — was removed, his wife would die and his already-born children would be motherless. The doctor also told Santorum that his wife’s fetus would not survive outside of the womb. According to Santorum, Karen went into labor as a result of the antibiotics, and then doctors gave her a drug that further induced labor. She delivered, and unfortunately the doctors were right.
Jezebel confuses an attempt to undergo surgery to save the life of her child with procedures a woman undergoes a to end the life of her child.
The Santorums’ child was not going to live regardless, yet Karen Santorum risked her life to take the pregnancy as far as possible. Both she and her husband committed to an early delivery with hope that a miracle would occur and their child would survive. Karen Santorum wasn’t going to live to carry the baby to term and the baby, due to a defect, didn’t have much of a chance outside the womb, but there was a chance. It does happen. The Santorums chose the route that provided the biggest return for the gamble. How asinine and petty for women to politicize the loss of a child for a straw man argument. Doing all you can to prevent the loss of a child you wanted is nothing like planning the execution of a child you don’t want. Of course, I don’t expect a site operated by drunk, self-described “slut machine(s)” who talk about how they don’t report rape (but like to use it as a political issue nonetheless) to understand the elementary difference. Perhaps, like our President, the issue is “above their pay grade.”
I sometimes wonder if the opinion writers for the Washington Post let anyone read their articles before they get published. The main stream media at one point prided itself for its “layers of editors and fact checkers,” but they seem to have disappeared. I say this because, every once in a while, I come across an article so deaf to its own irony that I need to stop and wonder. I don’t mean to say that I don’t expect a misrepresentation of facts, the building of straw men and a dozen other logical mistakes in the writings of ideologically compromised “journalists.” It’s just the absolutely unbridled transference that I would think that someone in those vaunted layers would maybe dare to say, “uh … about that.”
Such is the feeling I got when reading Richard Cohen’s latest screed in the Washington Post. I hope you’re ready for this one, it is pretty laughable. The GOP is a cult. You need to take a pledge to join up. Well, no, not exactly, but certain interest groups want you to promise to agree to their causes to get an endorsement. That’s totally like joining a cult, except it isn’t. For the sake of entertainment and to see how oblivious to irony these people are we’ll take a look.
Cohen has to make a silly jab at the memory of Ronald Regan to start things off.
“It is not enough to support the party or mouth banalities about Ronald Reagan …”
It is true there are those in the Republican Party who would use President Reagan’s memory as a political tool without actually believing in any of the principles that made the GOP the party of Reagan. However, the majority of Republicans do not “mouth banalities” about Reagan; they hold the truths that he espoused to be the bedrock upon which the country stands.
What are the pledges that have Cohen so up in arms?
No increase in taxes and any closing of loopholes would be matched by other tax cuts. Right, you can now run screaming into the woods as the mad cultists of the GOP come for you. Just not for your money.
The pro-life pledge is next on the list of bugaboos for Cohen. GOP candidates who want the endorsement of the Susan B. Anthony List must agree to oppose abortion including the opposition of judicial nominees who might decide against the wholesale slaughter of the unborn. Can you smell that? That’s the irony burning. If I could remind the Washington Post editorial staff it is the Democrat party who have for years been using the pro-abortion stance as a litmus test for judges. It is the radical feminists of NOW who have raised the concept of abortion to an inalienable right. A right that trumps every other consideration. A politician can be the biggest womanizing, sexual harassing scum bag, but if they are a pro-abortion advocate Democrat then they’re good to go. That’s a Pro-Hypocrisy stance if I have ever seen one.
Remember Media Matters, the wannabe news “watchdog” website that breeds blog posts like cockroaches? They’re a very prolific sock-puppet for every group that is not pro-life–and about as teeming with simple, small, yet ever-multiplying dirty content as an unwashed sock, too. I am hesitant to address their latest articles about Live Action because I suspect it will be somewhat like fighting the Hydra of Greek mythology: I will cut off one head only to see it sprout two more in its place–which look exactly the same as the original, of course, but are just a little angrier.
But here goes nothing.
Media Matters thinks Live Action’s new IN Medicaid video is a “hoax” because the video in fact:
has demonstrated that Planned Parenthood’s concerns – that women on Medicaid who rely on Planned Parenthood for preventive health care would lose that access under the Indiana law denying funds to Planned Parenthood – were accurate. [my emphasis]
By “that access,” Media Matters means “access to Planned Parenthood”:
To recap: Planned Parenthood’s Cecile Richards warned that women would not be able to go to Planned Parenthood for preventive care if they lost their funding. Rose claimed that she has “caught on tape” a Planned Parenthood worker in Indiana saying that because of the “new law,” a Medicaid recipient cannot get preventive care at Planned Parenthood. [my emphasis]
But Planned Parenthood’s argument against Indiana’s law is not simply that women would “lose their access to Planned Parenthood.” Planned Parenthood could probably get on fine with 9,300 less patients–but according to Planned Parenthood, those patients could not get on fine without Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood’s argument, given by Cecile Richards in a recent press release, is that Indiana’s law:
would have a devastating impact on women’s health and take away health care from thousands of women in Indiana, leaving them at greater risk for undetected cancers, untreated infections and unintended pregnancies. [my emphasis]
But in our investigation, Planned Parenthood Indiana clinics admit that Planned Parenthood is not the only option for healthcare that women on Medicaid have. Media Matters thinks the whole controversy about defunding Planned Parenthood is about a tautology, to wit: you can’t defund Planned Parenthood because then people can’t go to Planned Parenthood. In reality, the controversy is about whether or not Planned Parenthood is the only healthcare provider for women in need in Indiana–and the undercover tapes prove that they’re not.
The Washington Post noted that House Speaker John Boehner’s commencement speech at the Catholic University of America (CUA) was non-political. But the Post story about the speech was entirely political. The story slammed Boehner’s conservative Catholic views by using a student at the event—one of about 30 liberal “social justice” advocates—to argue that the Republican from Ohio isn’t compassionate enough toward the poor.
“Katy Jamison strode toward her graduation from Catholic University on Saturday wearing the requisite black robe and mortar board—plus a neon green message to House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio). ‘Where’s the compassion, Mr. Boehner?’ said the 8-by-10-inch sign pinned to her chest.”
Jamison, it turns out, was one of “about 30” involved in this “protest,” out of 1,500 students receiving bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral graduates. And this is what the Post decided to emphasize. It is a case study of liberal media bias through deliberate distortion. The purpose was to portray Boehner as not only heartless but out of step with the teaching of the Catholic Church. But the ploy failed, based on the paltry numbers of protesters, according to the paper’s own account.
Did you know the high holy days for three major religions are upon us? Passover, Easter, and … Earth Day. And it’s all about population control.
On Earth Day, Earthers bow down and worship Mother Gaia — this year on Good Friday of all days! — by turning off electricity around the world to save their de facto deity, affectionately personified as Gaia or Gaea, from the heresies of carbon, internal combustion engines and incandescent lighting. Despite the fact that there are more than 1 billlion (with a B) baptized Catholics, and 2.1 billion “Christians” worldwide, and that more than 77% of Americans identify themselves as either Jewish or Christian, secular businesses are gradually growing green, supplanting Passover and Good Friday with the pagan-like politically correct “Earth Day” because of the threat of capitalist-killing environmentalist-wacko policies.
We’re talking about a chunck of rock with a molten metal core circling a star, folks. People named the orbiting rock “earth” in the first place. The earth is not alive. It is a platform for life.
There is growing green shakedown out there, with local, national and international leaders revamping laws to make capitalism more difficult, taking away economic power from people to strengthen governmental control. And money really does grow on trees if those trees are part of an Earth Day celebration. My bank reminds me at its ATMs. Even the family photo calendar I ordered from Walgreens came with “Earth Day” printed where Good Friday should have been! My Staples day planner lists both titles side by side on the same line like co-star film billing.
Lawrence O’Donnell on his show Friday read an email from a woman who said she couldn’t afford either cable or birth control so “please Lawrence,” she wrote, “shout some sense into them.”
The way O’Donnell said that she couldn’t “even afford cable t.v. to watch this program” as though it was the Great Depression and she was going without food rather than cable.
In his haste to carry water for abortion advocates, O’Donnell makes no mention of the Women’s Health Program in Medicaid that already does exactly the things Planned Parenthood does (and even provides mammograms) or the many other clinics and organizations which do the same thing.
Don’t Worry, It’s Not Racist. He Just Wants Black Children To Die To Save Money.
What’s wrong with you, bitter clingers? Don’t you realize that a dead child is a cheap child? I mean, all dead babies cost is the funds to suck or cut them mercilessly from their mother’s womb. Presto! No more pesky expenses of a living child.
Ezra Klein, writing at the Washington Post, actually proffers that argument in favor of taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood; that abortions are cheaper for the government than having an “unintended pregnancy”. (That’s their euphemism for unborn baby killed by abortion.) His article is filled with predictable talking points, all easily disproved – the SBA List has already done so here. Setting the horrid spin aside, his concluding paragraph is truly vile:
The fight also isn’t about cutting spending. The services Planned Parenthood provides save the federal government a lot of money. It’s somewhat cold to put it in these terms, but taxpayers end up bearing a lot of the expense for unintended pregnancies among people without the means to care for their children. [my emphasis]
Media Matters knows nothing of what it speaks and continues to ignore the facts when it deals with health care laws, compliance, and regulations. In its zeal to prove Lee Stranahan wrong, MM ignores the fact that Planned Parenthood does not provide the mammography service. MM stated:
Team Breitbart is still challenging our perfectly accurate statement that Waco’s Planned Parenthood provides mammograms, apparently arguing that in order to provide a service it is necessary to perform that service. But this reasoning suffers an obvious and fatal flaw: it ignores the costs associated with providing a service.
[...]
We pointed out that Planned Parenthood in Waco pays for mammograms to be performed.
Let’s read on, shall we. Its narrow interpretation, simplistic definitions list, and cute sandwich analogy are completely flawed as there are layers of compliance, coding, and state/federal regulations health care practitioners/providers must abide. Let’s take this step by step for the Media Matters scribes, so they can follow along on who legally “provides” the service according to health care regulations, by which they which must be applied to this scenario to be accurate.
Unintentional consequences, I know. The sleuths of the Media Matters research team and their post drives the point home of why Planned Parenthood does not need taxpayer subsidies for cancer screenings:
In a statement to Media Matters, Felicia Chase Goodman, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Central Texas, explained that through a grant provided by the Susan G. Komen Foundation, Planned Parenthood “provides referrals and pays for mammograms and diagnostic follow up treatment for our patients at area radiology and surgical clinics.” Goodman said that last year alone, Planned Parenthood patients received 609 screening mammograms and 125 diagnostic mammograms. emphasis mine
First, I will say at least we now know where some of the Komen PP money is going. Secondly, while others have hashed out the provider-location argument, I would like to go back to the original point that Planned Parenthood’s CEO Cecile Richards made as the main reason to oppose the Pence Amendment to end PP’s taxpayer funding:
“If this bill ever becomes law, millions of women in this country are gonna lose their health care access–not to abortion services–to basic family planning, you know, mammograms, cancer screenings, cervical cancer.” emphasis mine
Richards immediately pushes the panic button of family planning, mammograms, cancer screenings, and cervical cancer [screenings]. However, as Media Matters shows us, Planned Parenthood’s mammograms are paid for by a grant from the Komen Foundation, while the Breast and Cervical Cancer Services (BCCS) program helps poor or uninsured women receive the services they need.
Usually, Live Action just ignores Media Matters. After all, there’s not much there you can’t find on the AOL/Huffington Post or the Democratic Underground. We were going to let slide their usual accusations that our new video was “a hoax” and that we were “falsely smearing Planned Parenthood President” Cecile Richards –until they cooked up a little hoax of their own. In this recent matter of the missing mammograms, we think we have to set the record straight.
Media Matters claimed that Planned Parenthood clinics in Waco, TX and Tucson, AZ do in fact provide mammograms. Well, we called both Planned Parenthood clinics in Waco, TX, and the Tucson, AZ clinic, to see if our actor could make a mammogram appointment with them. Based on the results, let’s say Media Matters got some false positives:
Mary Ruth Duncan Women’s Health Center
1121 Ross Avenue
PO Box 1518
Waco, TX 76703
p: 254.759.5750
PP: This is Cindy, how may I help you?
Caller: Hi, I was wondering if I could come in for a mammogram appointment?
PP: No, we don’t do mammograms here at Planned Parenthood.
Audre Rapaport Women’s Health Center
1927 Columbus Ave
P.O. Box 1459
Waco, TX 76701
p: 254.759.5772
Caller: Hi Alice, I was hoping to schedule a mammogram appointment at Planned Parenthood. Do you provide mammograms?
PP: Have you–okay, you want to schedule a mammogram appointment? We don’t do mammograms here at Planned Parenthood.
Jean Hoffman Health Center
529 W. Wetmore Rd.
Tucson, AZ 85705
p: 520.884.5562
PP: Thank you for calling Planned Parenthood Arizona, my name is Melissa, how may I assist you?
Caller: Hi, I was wondering if I could schedule a mammogram appointment? Do you provide mammograms?
PP: No, we don’t, I’m sorry.
In MM’s latest screed, they drop the argument about Tucson altogether (perhaps because they realized it rested on particularly flimsy evidence–an advertisement for another group’s “mammovan” to visit the clinic parking lot back in 2009. Plus, our video from Wednesday included a PP AZ representative admitting “We don’t provide those services whatsoever” and decided to focus entirely on Waco. And that’s where MM goes wacko.
They use a statement (which they have conspicuously not linked in their post) by PP Central TX CEO Felicia Chase Goodwin that says Planned Parenthood refers for mammograms to mean that Planned Parenthood provides mammograms:
“provides referrals and pays for mammograms and diagnostic follow up treatment for our patients at area radiology and surgical clinics.”
And then they drop the term “mammograms” altogether and cite the Texas Dept of Health’s listing of PP as a breast cancer screening provider:
“It’s not just Media Matters and Planned Parenthood who say that the Waco clinic provides cancer screenings; the Texas Department of Health says so.”
There are two types of breast cancer screening: manual exams, and mammograms. As everyone but Media Matters is now well aware, Planned Parenthood only does the former. And speaking of the Texas Department of Health, here’s an e-mail from them suggesting that Planned
Parenthood in Texas isn’t even licensed to perform mammograms:
So it should be pretty clear why Retracto wants that correction. Either Media Matters issues a correction or admits that it’s purpose isn’t media, it’s propaganda. Their call.
Yesterday, I did a piece showing how Media Matters used deceptive editing techniques on the Fox / Bill Sammon story. I’m still waiting to hear back from Sammon before I do part two but I wanted to show you a couple of more videos that I’ve done in the meantime.
The first one shows how Media Matters used the ‘straw man’ fallacy to attempt to discredit the piece published by Lila Rose yesterday on the Mammosham story. As I say in the video, your position on the controversial issue of abortion doesn’t really matter here – Media Matters are contemptible news twisters.
Early screening through mammograms and education is critical to end the suffering from this disease: 98 percent of women treated for early stage breast cancer, before it spreads, are alive five years later. The widespread use of mammography and heightened public awareness of breast cancer both contribute to these favorable statistics.
And while Komen Affiliates provide funds to pay for screening, education and treatment programs in dozens of communities, in some areas, the only place that poor, uninsured or under-insured women can receive these services are through programs run by Planned Parenthood. [emphasis mine]
Ask your health care provider, health department, or staff at your local Planned Parenthood health center about where you can get a mammogram in your area.
Additionally, it appears that PP does provide breast examsonly. However, the Komen memo links mammography, screenings, education, and treatment of breast cancer as their list of reasons it contributes to PP. It’s perpetuated all across the media without validation.
Now that LiveAction has proved that PP does NOT provide mammography services to its clients, what is the money being used for, because clearly is not for mammography screenings? Education, treatment? Are these questions we can expect our mainstream media propagandists to divulge in their articles? Or will the discovery stop with these citizen investigators and go unreported by the networks?
The Komen Foundation needs to come clean on specifically what those PP contributions are designated and why they really continue to support PP.
When it comes to the Make-Believe Media, some news is more equal than others. And it’s not just a numbers racket. So when do the numbers justify news coverage?
So it would seem 5,000 people doing anything vaguely political pretty much anywhere seems to be a magic news number, a politically critical mass worthy of coverage, right? Wrong. Consider two different events over the same weekend in the Los Angeles Area. Both drew over 5,000 registered marchers: One a “Labor” rally; the other a “Life” rally.
Here's something that no one is talking about concerning tonight's primaries: In my homestate of Missouri Prop C, the first legislative challenge to Obamacare exempting Missourians from Obamacare penalities, passed by 3-1 in every single county except Kansas City and St. Louis City. Rick Santorum took every...
Image credit: Corey Wilson, Green Bay Press-Gazette
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?