If you think Komen controversy is about breast cancer or abortion, you haven't been paying attention

[Newsjock]

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/the-komen-foundations-partisan-attack-on-planned-parenthood-the-women-who-are-upset-the-response-from-the-local-chapter-and-what-you-can-d/Content?oid=12241904

... If you think the controversy over the Komen’s defunding of Planned Parenthood is about breast cancer or abortion, you haven’t been paying attention.

Oh sure, it has something to do with abortion, and the Republican Party’s four-decade-long campaign to politicize it for partisan gain, but it is all part of a broader right-wing conspiracy to pick off and destroy progressive organizations one-by-one, particularly those that make the increasingly rare effort to combine public service with public advocacy.

... And it’s that nexus between service and advocacy that makes Planned Parenthood such a threat to the right, just like ACORN was before it.

... At its worst, the Komen Foundation and its anti-choice, Bush-connected executives are actively going after Planned Parenthood, exploiting trumped up allegations in an effort to destroy one of the few progressive organizations that makes an everyday impact on the lives of millions of Americans nationwide. At its best, Komen’s abject failure to defend Planned Parenthood makes it a passive collaborator in a calculated effort to cut off progressives (or perceived progressives) from the American people.

[DirkGently]

1. Unions, ACORN, Planned Parenthood. Anyone threatening to wield power on behalf of people, not money.

[chervilant]

4. Let's not forget

Public education...

[Uncle Joe]

6. That's what it is, in order to disenfranchise the American People which is the primary strategy for

Republican corporate supremacists to rule, they need to neutralize the power of any public organization that actually empowers, enlightens or lifts up the people.

A desperate people are easier to manipulate.

[Old and In the Way]

2. I couldn't agree more...this is a systematic effort to shut down progressive influence in a variety

of arenas. It really is a war conducted by a few dozen really wealthy reactionaries against a slim majority of thinking Americans. It's a pretty naked power play, perhaps the endgame. If they can't buy the political process soon, the vast majority of Americans are going to eventually use the power of government to push back hard against their 1% interests.

[global1]

7. I Agree That It's A Systematic Effort To Shut Down Progressive Influence - But Why Is It That The...

Repugs are so good at plotting these diabolical schemes and successful at carrying them out and the Dems aren't.

Don't the Dems have Think Tanks and Organizations that can mobilize efforts to twart the Repugs and their tactics?

Can't the Dems be as diabolical in a 180 degree fashion and do the same thing - only to help people versus hurting people like the Repugs seem to be good at?

We sit here and watch all this going on. We can connect the dots and see that the Repugs have a concerted effort with the help of Repug governors and just happening to get crony plants placed high up in organizations so that they take control and upend them - like what is happening with the Komen Foundation and what happened in Wisconsin, Indiana and Arizona, etc.

We see this happening. We call it here on DU. We hear Ed and Rachel and Keith talk about this going on in their telecasts - yet we seem so helpless in preventing it from happening.

I just don't get it.

[drm604]

9. They own or control much of our communication infrastructure.

That's how.

Even so, the tide may be turning against them. I don't think they expected quite this large a response to this move by SGK. If they had they would have had their story straight from the beginning instead of desperately changing their excuses trying to find one that sticks.

The internet is a problem for them. That's why they keep trying to find ways to attack it.

[TBF]

11. Good point about the Internet -

I immediately thought about the news programs but we still have the Internet (although they are trying to get that too). Thankfully for us they couldn't overpower the Silicon Valley guys. When they pushed SOPA the California guys struck back - and those guys have a lot of money. Make no mistake, they are protecting the internet because they want to profit off it, but at least the side benefit is that we can still talk on here.

[CoffeeCat]

12. The answer is right in front of you...

...the problem is--the answer is horrible.

The vast majority of Democrats are aligned with the Republicans. Both parties are aligned with the corporations
and the elites who are all making these bad decisions. There is no way in hell that our civil rights, our privacy
and our power could have been eroded, without the blessing and cooperation of Democrats. There's just no way
in hell.

Do you hear more than a few token Democrats full of outrage and going up against the Fascism that has engulfed
our nation for years? Every once in a while, one of them makes a fiery speech from the House or Senate floor, but
there is no real fight against what is happening to this country.

The differences on social issues--between Republicans and Democrats--are merely a facade now. They keep the bases
of both parties fired up and focused on "red meat" while the bastards on both sides sell out to the corporations and
convert our democracy into a corporate-controlled government enabled by criminal politicians.

If you look at every political problem from this vantage point--you will see the truth. It took me a few years to
come to grips with what has happened to our government, our politicians and our democracy. Denial is much
easier because it's very painful.

[cyberpj]

13. I agree. This is THE fundamental problem we face. Electing "real" citizens who can then get $ out

of politics should be OWS and The 99% protesters real war cry!

The people runnin D.C. don't care how much we protest Citizens United and claim our majority percentages, it does nothing to threaten them at this point. Wait and see how many incumbents get re-elected thanks to the corporate money that buys them their positions in order to help corporations.

What needs to happen is for 'the people' to use the Internet to encourage their charismatic friends and relatives or neighbors to run for office and then hope we still have enough of a voting system left to elect them so that they can get in there in numbers large enough to change the laws.

I think we actually DO need a Populist party that can get air time to talk truth instead of all the pandering.

Of course, believing that will happen in what's left of my lifetime - after seeing the movements of the 60's crushed by both government surveillance (sp?) and infiltration by trouble-makers (ring any bells Oakland?) plus the distraction and brain numbing of the drug culture has left me with very little hope as things are much much worse now as far as the Big Brother activity.

Until there is some sort of true revolution I don't see any real change coming our way unless it's temporary gains in order to shut us up for a while so then things can go back to business as usual.

But believe me, I would be only to happy to be proven wrong.

[global1]

15. "Occupy Wall Street" Should Be "Occupy Congress".....

the battle cry should be to get the money out of politics. We should push for term limits. Maybe let a Senator serve for 8 years but no chance of re-election after their 8 year term. Maybe a Congressman should have a 4 year term with no chance of re-election. If they can't run for re-election - their need for money is diminished and there is less chance they can be bought off. In my mind the biggest problem we're faced with is a Congress on the take. Get the money out of politics and maybe we have a fighting chance.

[cyberpj]

16. No argument from me. The only real attention to get is with huge D.C. crowds. Hopefully,

this Spring?

[Old and In the Way]

17. I think the RW does more than talk about it. They fund people to push their agenda forward.

They pay for play. Our side doesn't. I'll bet if there was $200MM available to pay salaries for 5000 people to work fulltime on a progressive agenda, that would make an impact. I'd sure like to know what the RW spends to saturate their messaging in this country...I'd bet it adds up to over a billion dollars.

[lyonn]

20. Too many politicians have been bought and paid for

Thanks to the Supreme Court. One large reason to keep Obama in control of the Ship!!!

[Ilsa]

3. Yes, it's much broader than

A few health issues or women's authority over their own bodies. It's about undoing any group that assists outside of the plutocracy.

Other industrialized countries must be either laughing at us or saying, "For shame."

[DBoon]

5. This is the defintion of totalitarianism

No organization can be permitted to exist outside of the ruling class

In my childhood we were told how terrible it was in communist countries, that all organizations had to serve their rulers and no independent religious, community, professional, or political groups were allowed.

[Old and In the Way]

18. The RW really wants a One Party State.

As long as their are the ruling Party. They have more in common with the Chinese Communist Party than they realize. Chinese Communists today are far more in bed with the business classes than they are as true representatives of the people. Republicans are probably jealous that the Chinese Communists are able to enforce their political will that makes any other Party illegal.

[xchrom]

8. du rec. nt

[niyad]

14. k and r

[Bozita]

19. K&R

[The Doctor.]

21. An orchestrated effort to disempower the poor.

I can think of few things as despicable.

[TalkingDog]

22. My favorite bit: Give Komen the finger by making a donation to Planned Parenthood in Komen’s name.

Here’s how you do it. Go to PlannedParenthood.org and hit the “Donate” button in the top right-hand corner of your screen. Then, instead of donating a “One Time Gift,” click on the “Honorary Giving” tab in the middle of your screen. Now you can donate money to Planned Parenthood while requesting that a “Thank you for donating!” card be sent to:

Karen Handel - Senior VP
c/o Susan G. Komen Foundation
P.O. Box 650309
Dallas, TX 75265

Just put in Handel’s address under the “Acknowledgments” section of your donation. (Handel is one of the anti-choice, right-wing nutbags guiding Komen’s decision to defund Planned Parenthood.) This ensures that your funds go toward supporting much-needed breast-cancer screenings for women while sending Komen a strong message—i.e., don’t put ideology ahead of women’s reproductive health care.

[Skittles]

24. that's what a lot of folk did - to the tune of THREE MILLION DOLLARS

in your fact, fucking sanctimonious repuke assholes!!!

[Skittles]

23. repukes see PP the same way they see unions

they are SOOOO threatened by anything that helps the common folk

[Blue Owl]

25. It's the GOP's "Operation Pink Dagger"

n/t

[allan01]

26. re:If you think Komen controversy is about breast cancer or abortion, you haven't been paying attent

[abelenkpe]

27. K & R

[starroute]

28. It's called "defunding the left" and I and others kept posting about it back at DU2

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x876774

from Mother Jones:

When Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker took on his state's public-sector unions last January, it seemed to require no explanation. Republicans are sympathetic to corporate interests and opposed to organized labor, and challenging public-sector workers' pay and benefits appeared to be just one more skirmish in a longstanding ideological battle.

But Walker went one crucial step further. He deliberately sparked a dangerous, months-long war by proposing to end the public-sector unions' collective bargaining rights entirely. Why take that risk?

Here's why: Politics in the United States is a game played on multiple levels, and ideology is only the first. Walker was playing on a second, deeper level, where the issues are secondary. Here, the goal is not so much to advance one party's agenda, but to actively undermine the infrastructure that allows the opposing party to exist at all. And on this level, one of America's two political parties routinely outplays the other: Defunding the left is a longtime goal of the smartest and savviest Republican strategists, and they've pursued it for decades.

The old-school version of this tactic began in the '70s and '80s with the right's campaign to undermine private-sector unions, traditionally one of the Democratic Party's biggest sources of funding and campaign support.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x492426

Source: RawStory

"When Michele Bachman crowed in September that the exposure of alleged illegal activity by the anti-poverty group ACORN was just the start of a campaign to "defund the left," she may have revealed more about current Republican strategy than she intended. . . .

The idea of starving the Democratic Party of donations by defunding the progressive non-profits that form a central pillar of its support is not new. It goes back to at least 1981, when the Heritage Foundation published a set of over 2000 policy recommendations for the Reagan administration. According to SourceWatch, "One challenge, as Heritage saw it, was to counter the rise of its ideological opponents by whittling away their status as 'public interest' organisations and eliminating federal financial support for 'liberal' groups."

The Capital Research Center (CRC) was founded in 1984 by a former Heritage Foundation vice president to implement this agenda by uncovering the presumably questionable funding sources of progressive groups. CRC's central assumption has always been that "a unified, sophisticated and well-funded philanthropic elite is dedicated to imposing on us the doctrine of 'progressive' philanthropy, doctrines that would reorder our political, economic and cultural priorities."

The CRC selected ACORN as a favored targed long before almost anybody else had heard of the group.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/www//seattletimes.nwsource.com/www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/deip/www.leftyblogs.com/cgi-bin/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=110x13298

By David Weigel 9/29/09 10:51 AM

I caught up with Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) at the How to Take Back America Conference to follow up on an issue that had come up there: “defunding the Left.” After ACORN, what was the next natural target for Republicans? King said it would be the Service Employees International Union.

“When you think what happened to Communists after the wall fell down in ‘89,” said King, “they didn’t just curl up and decide to become capitalists. They would go back and reform like — Oh, it’s like trying to squash an amoeba.”

King stressed that Republicans had momentum on the issue right now, and needed to “push as long and hard as we can, because once the media turns their attention away, I don’t know that they come back again"


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x769143#771042

(My own post)

I have a saved file summarizing the 2001 Conservative Political Action Conference (no longer on line) which includes a paragraph saying, "Next, a panel on 'Defunding the Left,' moderated by the Leadership Institute’s Morton Blackwell, focused on big labor, and how government policies and funds enrich this 'engine of the far left,' as Stefan Gleason of the National Right to Work Foundation called it."

You've just got to know that if Morton Blackwell is part of it, it's got to be dirty.

And I have an article (also not online) which appeared in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 1995 that starts out with a correction:

"The first name of Ed Gillespie, a spokesman for House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas, was omitted from a story yesterday on congressional Republicans' plans to trim the budgets of some government-funded nonprofit groups. Their aim is to identify nonprofit organizations whose funding should be cut and to plan a strategy to end their grants or contracts with the government or the programs for which they provide services.

"Led by Virginia Lamp Thomas, the wife of the Supreme Court justice, a special group of senior House Republican experts and staff members has been quietly working under the auspices of House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas. Their aim is to identify nonprofit organizations whose funding should be cut and to plan a strategy to end their grants or contracts with the government or the programs for which they provide services."

Yeah, that Ed Gillespie and that Virginia Thomas. Funny how the same names and agendas keep coming round, isn't it?

The article goes on to explain that "The effort, referred to by conservatives as 'defunding the left,' is intended to take aim at what they consider advocacy groups that lobby for liberal social programs from which they receive grants and contracts."

And it notes that "Thomas is a former Labor Department lawyer under the Republicans and lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce who last year earned $78,800 as a senior policy coordinator for the House Republican Conference. She joined Armey's staff on Jan. 4 as his $108,234 chief liaison for all House committees. She declined to return telephone calls, and sources said she is sensitive about her position and reluctant to be seen as a leader in Armey's defunding effort. Her involvement in the defunding effort has raised sharp questions among liberals who recall that some of the targeted groups -- labor unions, legal advocates and the National Organization for Women -- were involved in the bitter battle to defeat her husband's nomination."