SGK is coming under fire for cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening. I had seen some activity on Facebook calling for people to quit sending contributions to SGKF as a result.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/susan-g-komens-funding-cut-to-planned-parenthood-only-latest-in-string-of-controversies/2012/02/01/gIQAeQlXhQ_blog.html?tid=pm_national_pop
Interesting story. The funding doesn't seem to be a large amount, less than $700K per year but sounds like this could cost the Komen Foundation millions in contributions.
Yeah, the "new" CEO is apparently a Bush-style (so-called) conservative with a very strong anti-choice PoV. However, the excuse is that PP is under "investigation" by Congress. Never mind that there aren't even any real accusations, just Congressional Republicans doing their usual dirt-digging on anyone and everyone they can think of that might possibly make the other side look bad. They learned well from Nixon on that count.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 01, 2012, 12:19:51 PM
SGK is coming under fire for cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening. I had seen some activity on Facebook calling for people to quit sending contributions to SGKF as a result.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/susan-g-komens-funding-cut-to-planned-parenthood-only-latest-in-string-of-controversies/2012/02/01/gIQAeQlXhQ_blog.html?tid=pm_national_pop
Interesting story. The funding doesn't seem to be a large amount, less than $700K per year but sounds like this could cost the Komen Foundation millions in contributions.
I'm yanking mine...
Please define what you're yanking.
Quote from: AquaMan on February 01, 2012, 05:43:29 PM
Please define what you're yanking.
Why did you ask him that?
:o
Not clear if he is really excited to see the funding drop and is typing one handed or if he is pulling his donations because of the funding drop. Kids are reading these posts you know. ;)
Komen really stepped in it. No one really buys the reasoning for the funding cut, and it's politicized enough now that it wouldn't matter even if that was the original motivation. As my brilliant spouse said to me tonight, the perceived statement was strong enough so that they can't reverse position. And they can't go to much forward without actually endangering their core mission, which is breast cancer prevention. All in all -- in one fell swoop -- a terrible position for Komen to have put themselves in.
On a personal level, I can tell you that neither me nor my spouse will donate or run/walk in the Race for the Cure from here on out. All of our time and money will now go directly to Planned Parenthood, an organization that provided us with crucial care during the decade when we didn't have health insurance. And we were solid former Komen supporters -- donating and participating in their public outings (Race for the Cure was our first 5k after quitting smoking). But we're done with all that, will donate solely to PP from here on out.
Komen Founder: We Won't 'Bow Down'
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/02/02/komen-founder-we-won-t-bow-down.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/02/02/komen-founder-we-won-t-bow-down.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
QuoteThe founder of the Susan G. Komen for the Cure released a video Wednesday defending the cancer foundation's harshly criticized decision to stop raising money for Planned Parenthood. "We will never bow down to political pressure," Nancy Brinker said in the YouTube video. The foundation's website was hacked briefly at midnight Thursday, with hackers writing "help us run over poor women on our way to the bank." While the foundation has said the decision to stop granting funds was based on "eligibility" and "grant-strengthening," many have speculated it had to do with politics—especially since the organization's new senior vice-president is a former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Karen Handel who is anti-abortion and reportedly retweeted that it is "typical of an abortion group to turn a fundraising decision into a politicial bomb." The tweet has since been deleted. A top Komen official reportedly resigned immediately after the decision to cut funding was made.
And I will no longer go into a Brinker chain restaurant .... I'm yanking them too.
I heard a disturbing statistic this morning on the SGK story on CBS:
Over the last five years, Planned Parenthood has provided 130,000 mammograms which were funded by Komen.
Does that number seem pretty small to anyone else considering the earning power of the Komen foundation? That works out to 26,000 mammograms a year for women who would be lower income or who do not have health insurance. That's an average of 520 mammograms per state. I'm curious if the mammogram services are simply underutilized by PP clients or due to limited funding by Komen over that five year period.
I tend to be skeptical of larger foundations like Komen or Livestrong as I believe they can get too big to serve their mission and they become a place for a chosen lucky few to make a huge salary while the focus seems to become more constant shilling for money rather than distributing money in a meaningful manner.
Here's a copy of Komen financials. They do pay out quite a bit toward their mission compared to administrative costs but the breakdown on expenditures seems to have skewed priorities to me.
Out of $439 million total revenue for FY 2011:
"Supporting Services" takes about $75 mm
Education: $181mm
Research: $75mm
Health Screening: $54mm
Treatment Services: $23mm
Education eats up about $25mm in salaries and benefits. Not sure why the emphasis seems to be on education instead of treatment, screening, and research. Anyone else want to take a swing at that.
http://ww5.komen.org/uploadedFiles/Content/AboutUs/Financial/2011%20Komen%20Financial%20Statements%20FINAL(3).pdf
I'm not saying foundations like this one are inherently bad, I simply think they can become too politically-driven and either wittingly or unwittingly become political tools. I personally quit contributing to Livestrong when they came out strongly in favor of Obamacare and I question their priorities. They also list "education" as a primary expense over research or treatment grants and spend a fair amount of their budget on "government relations". I still wear a Livestrong bracelet for cancer awareness, but don't participate in Livestrong events, fundraising, nor personal contributions.
Quote from: Teatownclown on February 02, 2012, 10:42:30 AM
And I will no longer go into a Brinker chain restaurant .... I'm yanking them too.
Eat local anyhow, it's a good practice.
Aren't they down to Chili's and Maggianos now and just a minority stake in Romano's? They are full of "meh" anyhow.
I'm irritated by their move, but I'm surprised by the outcry. Pleased, but surprised.
They won't budge till fundraising actually drops enough to make up for the grants they will now receive from their new friends. The best thing to happen would be for a competitive foundation to spring up that would actually be non political.
Top Susan G. Komen Official Resigned Over Planned Parenthood Cave-In
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-official-resigned-over-planned-parenthood-cave-in/252405/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-official-resigned-over-planned-parenthood-cave-in/252405/)
Quote from: Conan71 on February 02, 2012, 11:09:28 AM
I heard a disturbing statistic this morning on the SGK story on CBS:
Over the last five years, Planned Parenthood has provided 130,000 mammograms which were funded by Komen.
Does that number seem pretty small to anyone else considering the earning power of the Komen foundation? That works out to 26,000 mammograms a year for women who would be lower income or who do not have health insurance. That's an average of 520 mammograms per state. I'm curious if the mammogram services are simply underutilized by PP clients or due to limited funding by Komen over that five year period.
PP does a whole lot more breast exams than that, but only this relatively small fraction were funded by Komen. (although I thought it was 33,000 a year with the Komen money) Nonetheless, it surely isn't going to help. I think we all agree that preventative screenings are one of the easiest things we can do to keep healthcare costs down. Treating diseases, even cancer, early not only usually results in a better prognosis, but often lessens the amount of intervention necessary.
It annoys me to no end that people feel the need to play politics with women's health like this.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/02/02/146297351/wave-of-donations-help-planned-parenthood-make-up-most-of-komens-funding?ft=1&f=1001&sc=tw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/02/02/146297351/wave-of-donations-help-planned-parenthood-make-up-most-of-komens-funding?ft=1&f=1001&sc=tw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)
New Donations Help Planned Parenthood Make Up Most Of Komen's Funding
QuotePlanned Parenthood says a flurry of new donations over the past couple of days has essentially made up the funding gap left by Susan G. Komen for the Cure's decision to discontinue funding for the organization.
Bloomberg reports that as of Wednesday afternoon, Planned Parenthood had received $400,000 in pledges from 6,000 donors. Planned Parenthood also said that an emergency fund was started with a $250,000 gift from the foundation of Texas oil baron Lee Fikes and his wife, Amy.
That totals $650,000, which is not far from the $680,000 that Komen gave Planned Parenthood last year.
"People respond powerfully when they see politics interfering with women's health," a spokesman for Planned Parenthood told the AFP. "That's why we've seen a tremendous outpouring of support."
As our friends over at Shots told us this morning, Komen said efficiency and not politics led to its decision to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood, which provides both breast screenings and abortions. But the decision from the country's leading breast cancer charity, which was announced on Tuesday night, unleashed strong feelings on both sides of the abortion debate.
I suspect the PR fallout from this will actually result in PP making back much more in direct contributions than what they lost from Komen. I've been seeing a lot of chatter that makes it look that way on Facebook if that's any sort of bellwether for people's actions.
Curious to see if Race For The Cure takes a huge hit on entries this next year.
Considering the annual contribution to Planned Parenthood was something like .001% of Komen's annual revenues, I'd say they lost a crap ton of goodwill over a very small amount of money.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 02, 2012, 02:28:36 PM
I'd say they lost a crap ton of goodwill over a very small amount of money.
That's what happens when partisan demagogues take control and foist their ideology on a nonpartisan organization. It would be one thing if PP had a history of using funds earmarked for other purposes to fund abortions, but they don't. If anything, they are probably the biggest single preventer of abortions in the US today, although many Catholics probably take exception to their method of doing so.
I like how their rationale has changed. First it was because PP was "under investigation" and now it's because they're "inefficient." I wonder what's next.
Quote from: nathanm on February 02, 2012, 02:42:04 PM
I like how their rationale has changed. First it was because PP was "under investigation" and now it's because they're "inefficient." I wonder what's next.
Satan
Quote from: Townsend on February 02, 2012, 02:42:53 PM
(http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll39/macgirl0033/church-lady-satan.jpg)
That is who said it in my head when I wrote it. Dana Carvey is tattooed in my brain.
CNN FB post:
QuoteBreaking News: Susan G. Komen for the Cure to restore Planned Parenthood breast cancer screening funds, Sen. Frank Lautenberg says.
Wise move, but this has been a PR clusterfark for them. They've been exposed for political activism which I think will still blunt their fund-raising for the next year or two.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 03, 2012, 10:36:48 AM
Wise move, but this has been a PR clusterfark for them. They've been exposed for political activism which I think will still blunt their fund-raising for the next year or two.
There be a large quantity of taint on them.
So much for the politically correct.... ;)
Damage is done. They're going to lose a lot of $$ this year for that.
As an aside: it's incredible the amount of brand damage two days on social media time can cause. Mi esposa, who works in social media, calls it the strength of slacktivism -- or activism from the couch. A facebook post coupled with a small donation made from your laptop multiplied by a hundred thousand can cause major movements in record time. It's in the same family as the Arab Spring stuff, and the OWS stuff. Social media is used as an organizing tool, but it also seems to function on a bigger level as well . . . as a method to align opinion quickly, as a method to evolve ideas and action quickly. It's just really really fast people power, and I guarantee you that one of the major tech threads of the next century will be how large bureaucracies of the world (not just govs, but also corps) try to limit that power.
I mean look how out of control the Komen got from their point of view. And how fast. And isn't that the point of bureaucracy? To limit uncertainty and to solidify what might not be solid? To keep collateral damage from things like this to marginal degrees? There's just no way that the kind of power we're seeing doesn't get capped in some form.
I don't care for the abortion-side of PP's business. Pure and simple. As a personal option, I'm glad I was never put in a position to help make a decision like that, but I feel it's a decision that is up to a woman and between her and her spiritual higher power if she has one. It bothers me to the core when women use abortion as their primary form of birth control.
If PP did not have a reputation for co-mingling funds and Komen funds were specific to mammogram screenings, all Komen was doing was potentially removing an important screening process to those who otherwise could not afford the screening. I'm a huge believer in early detection and making sure every woman can get the proper screening in a timely manner regardless of their economic situation. I've known far too many women and men who have died from this disease, it's slow, painful and I've seen people in remission have it come back as a bone cancer. It also runs in my family and FMC's, so I have legit concerns for my mother, my daughters and my future wife. My family all has good health plans so being able to get timely screenings is not a concern, but it is for many others.
Aside from that singular issue, I was somewhat disturbed from digging deeper into the financials at how much these cancer foundations spend on "education" and "government relations" rather than treatment, research, or screening funding. I'm also pissed off to no end that these foundations are becoming political tools.
Needless to say, FMC and I won't be participating in any RFTC events this year.
I don't think anyone prefers that abortion be used as a primary form of birth control. You may or may not know that PP also (usually) provides the whole spectrum of women's health services, including contraceptives, IUDs and other forms of birth control. That's the vast majority of what they do.
If you look at the statistics available on abortions (I think I've detailed them here in the distant past), you'll find that most women who have abortions have only one in their lifetime, and the vast majority of the remainder have only two. The whole serial abortion as birth control thing is something that isn't really supported by the evidence.
Quote from: nathanm on February 03, 2012, 03:39:03 PM
I don't think anyone prefers that abortion be used as a primary form of birth control. You may or may not know that PP also (usually) provides the whole spectrum of women's health services, including contraceptives, IUDs and other forms of birth control. That's the vast majority of what they do.
If you look at the statistics available on abortions (I think I've detailed them here in the distant past), you'll find that most women who have abortions have only one in their lifetime, and the vast majority of the remainder have only two. The whole serial abortion as birth control thing is something that isn't really supported by the evidence.
Statistics are meaningless when you are holding the hand of a dear friend who wants to commit suicide because she's so horrified by what she's just done. Statistics are meaningless when your stepdaughter admits she's been reckless and stupid and that she's far too irresponsible to carry a baby to full term even for someone else to adopt. Statistics are meaningless to another friend whose womb was so scarred from a couple of abortions, she was incapable of bearing a child.
I made it perfectly clear I'm fine with abortion services being available to those who seek and need them. It doesn't mean I need to agree with it as a personal choice, nor do I care to have someone attempt to sway my personal moral code with vacuous statistics. Just because I'm not screaming my approval of abortion nor the fact that I've never caused the need for one doesn't mean I haven't lived through it with people who were close to me.
I didn't say you should like it (even I would prefer people not need/want them!), I'm only saying that claiming that serial abortions are actually a "thing" that we need to deal with doesn't comport with the facts. I'm sure it happens, but I'm also quite sure it's very rare.
That contention is one I'm particularly sensitive to, as it is one of the more commonly cited "reasons" for the anti-choice folks to trot out as justification for their thinking they should be in control of women's bodies.
Top Susan G. Komen Official Resigns After Planned Parenthood Flap
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-official-resigns-after-planned-parenthood-flap/?abcnews&abcnewsdotcom (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-official-resigns-after-planned-parenthood-flap/?abcnews&abcnewsdotcom)
QuoteA top official at the Susan G. Komen for the Cure breast cancer foundation resigned today following the charity's decision to reverse its policy barring funding for Planned Parenthood.
Karen Handel, a former Republican gubernatorial candidate in Georgia, denied in her resignation letter that she had anything to do with the decision to end funding for Planned Parenthood, which she says was made under guidelines formulated before she was hired.
Critics of the foundation's decision linked the move to Handel, a vocal opponent of abortion and Planned Parenthood.
"I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it. I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen's future and the women we serve," she wrote in the letter that was obtained by several media outlets. "However, the decision to update our granting model was made before I joined Komen, and the controversy related to Planned Parenthood has long been a concern to the organization. Neither the decision nor the changes themselves were based on anyone's political beliefs or ideology."
"What was a thoughtful and thoroughly reviewed decision — one that would have indeed enabled Komen to deliver even greater community impact — has unfortunately been turned into something about politics. This is entirely untrue. This development should sadden us all greatly," she added.
Handel declined a severance package.
The Susan G. Komen foundation confirmed Handel's resignation and acknowledged "mistakes" in the way it handled the controversy that erupted last week.
"We have made mistakes in how we have handled recent decisions and take full accountability for what has resulted, but we cannot take our eye off the ball when it comes to our mission," the organization's chief executive and founder, Nancy Brinker, said in a statement. "Today I accepted the resignation of Karen Handel... I have known Karen for many years, and we both share a common commitment to our organization's lifelong mission, which must always remain our sole focus. I wish her the best in future endeavors."
Hiding a new partnership with the dark side?
Annoyingly melodramatic, that Olbermann, but accurate as far as I can tell. :(
Quote from: nathanm on February 08, 2012, 12:49:50 PM
Annoyingly melodramatic, that Olbermann, but accurate as far as I can tell. :(
He's like Beck with spittle instead of tears.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 08, 2012, 03:26:08 PM
He's like Beck with spittle instead of tears.
He was OK the first year on MSNBC; after that I quit watching. He's not as looney as the goldseller, but he's over the top for sure.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 08, 2012, 03:26:08 PM
He's like Beck with spittle instead of tears.
Actually, he shares similar personality traits....you certain you're not related? Similar looks too....
We all have secrets, Conan.
Any time I feel Pro Life, all I have to do is watch Olbermann and I understand why people choose to terminate.
Quote from: Gaspar on February 08, 2012, 03:58:21 PM
Any time I feel Pro Life, all I have to do is watch Olbermann and I understand why people choose to terminate.
Beck has that same effect on me. You know you're crazy when Fox News cans you for being too kooky.
Quote from: Teatownclown on February 08, 2012, 03:41:49 PM
Actually, he shares similar personality traits....you certain you're not related? Similar looks too....
We all have secrets, Conan.
I don't urinate in my trash can at my desk.
I'm pretty certain he's got more in common with Bahny Fwank than he does with me. Even looks a little like him.
Quote from: Gaspar on February 08, 2012, 03:58:21 PM
Any time I feel Pro Life, all I have to do is watch Olbermann and I understand why people choose to terminate.
I guess that is a bright side to abortion. One less liberal coming into the world.
Quote from: Gaspar on February 08, 2012, 03:58:21 PM
Any time I feel Pro Life, all I have to do is watch Olbermann and I understand why people choose to terminate.
That's it, vilify KO....ignore Brinker and her dark connections. Boycott Chili's and On the Border and any other of their eateries....
Politically Incorrect.... Conan, no need to get pissy. ;D
Quote from: Conan71 on February 08, 2012, 04:01:32 PM
I don't urinate in my trash can at my desk.
Maybe not, but someone clearly pissed in your Wheaties this morning. :P
Quote from: Gaspar on February 08, 2012, 03:58:21 PM
Any time I feel Pro Life, all I have to do is watch Olbermann and I understand why people choose to terminate.
He developed his over the top response (LWRE) as a direct and opposite response to the "other guys". Just took his side longer to get it together enough to provide the equal and opposite balance to the RWRE. Actually, it would take about 5 or 6 more just like him to provide anything approaching real balance....
Both sides need to shut up and sit down.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on February 08, 2012, 07:49:50 PM
He developed his over the top response (LWRE) as a direct and opposite response to the "other guys". Just took his side longer to get it together enough to provide the equal and opposite imbalance to the RWRE. Actually, it would take about 5 or 6 more just like him to provide anything approaching real balance.... No those kooks already exist: Franken, Garafalo, Matthews, and most of the lame-stream media.
Both sides need to shut up and sit down.
FIFY
Quote from: Conan71 on February 09, 2012, 09:23:28 AM
FIFY
Because guys like Hannity, Weiner/Savage, et al are so moderate....LOL.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 09, 2012, 09:23:28 AM
FIFY
True, the imbalance is 7 or 8 to one on the side of the RWRE, but I didn't want to appear as though I were exaggerating the situation. Good to see that you recognize the reality.
It's a shame giving in to politics and outside pressure did harm to a respected charity.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/04/more-bad-news-for-komen-vice-president-biden-will-skip-d-c-event.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/04/more-bad-news-for-komen-vice-president-biden-will-skip-d-c-event.html)
More Bad News for Komen: Vice President Biden Will Skip D.C. Event
QuoteAs the Susan G. Komen foundation gears up for its most high-profile event of the year, its Global Race for the Cure in Washington, Vice President Joe Biden will not be hosting a kickoff barbecue for the annual D.C. race, as he and his wife, Dr. Jill Biden, have done in previous years.
Meanwhile, U.S. Congressman Mike Honda, who formed a team for the race last year that raised more than $10,000—making him the top fundraiser on Capitol Hill—told The Daily Beast that he will not be participating this year, linking the decision to Komen's move to cut funds to Planned Parenthood earlier this year amid pressure from Catholic bishops.
The Komen foundation quickly reversed its Planned Parenthood decision amid a backlash, but it has struggled since then, with some Komen affiliates around the country reporting declines in participants at spring races and other fundraising events.
The Bidens cited a scheduling conflict for their decision not to host the kickoff for the June 2 event.
Rep. Honda's office was critical of Komen, saying that while the congressman "supports the Susan G. Komen foundation's vital work," he also "believes that Komen must act to rebuild trust with all its partners," according to communications director Jack d'Annibale. "Komen must act to ensure its work benefits all women. Congressman Honda was the first member of Congress to call on Komen to reverse its Planned Parenthood decision, and he will remain vigilant for any attempt to use partisan politics to derail the urgent mission to defeat cancer and protect the health of women everywhere," d'Annibale said.
The Komen foundation said it remains "very optimistic about the race," according to Leslie Aun, Komen's vice president for communications. "The numbers are lower than where we were last year at this time, but typically what happens is that in the days leading up to the race, we close the gap." Aun, who will be leaving her post at Komen this month to join a D.C. group called Venture Philanthropy Partners, added, "Fewer dollars mean fewer women we serve, and that is really sad. Lots of women in D.C. need the funds Komen provides. This is about the women and our communities."
At last year's Washington race, nearly 40,000 people participated, with 45 congressional offices forming teams. The event raised more than $5 million, according to the Komen foundation. Seventy-five percent of funds raised at community races stay in the local community, going to screening for treatment and women, according to Komen. The other 25 percent goes to research.
"Just this week, someone at a local lesbian health organization for women with cancer told me she wished people knew what we do for them," Aun says. "We're their largest grantee." She added, "We hope people continue to support Komen for the right reasons. It is not about politics—it is about breast cancer. To politicize breast cancer is wrong. There are too many women at this moment who are counting on us to help them in their fight. Everything else is noise and nonsense."
In the 30 years since the Komen foundation was launched, it has raised some $1.9 billion for cancer research. More than 100,000 volunteers work in a nationwide network of affiliates. It was all the vision of Nancy Brinker. A former U.S. Ambassador to Hungary, she created the charity after her sister, Susan G. Komen, died of breast cancer in her mid-30s.
In the wake of the Planned Parenthood flap, Komen canceled it annual lobbying day in D.C., at which activists push for government programs, not for Komen programs—raising concerns that the controversy could have wide-reaching effects on women's health. Separately, Komen's New York City affiliate postponed two spring fundraisers amid concerns about participation. Affiliates from Florida to Arizona have reported declines in race participants and funds. Dana Curish, the executive director of the Central Indiana affiliate, said her recent race had 27,126 participants, down from 37,450 last year. "Right now our fundraising dollars are also down about 28 percent," she said, "but fundraising stays open until May 21, so we still have time to change those numbers and are offering incentives."
Not all affiliates attribute declines to the Planned Parenthood issue. Miriam Ross, the executive director of the Komen affiliate in Southwest Florida, said fundraising was down around 10 percent at her group's race—to $850,000—but that she believes the downturn was due to seasonal factors. "We live in a tourist area that is dependent on seasonal residents. This year was the warmest winter in decades, and that had an effect on the number of seasonal tourists that typically come down from January to April," she said. She added, "We had more than 10,000 attendees at the race this year. We have a tremendous amount of support from the local community, and over the past 10 years have been able to fund programs totaling $5.7 million. These local grants fund education, screening, and treatment for those people in our community who have nowhere else to turn."
Aun, the Komen spokeswoman, stressed the importance of support from local communities. "We know people have been upset. We've made mistakes, and we've apologized," she said. "We're trying to move forward in the best way we can. We cannot do that without the support of the local community. Our local community in D.C. is Congress."
Take a look at the comments to that story. Enlightening...
Quote from: guido911 on May 04, 2012, 10:16:08 AM
Take a look at the comments to that story. Enlightening...
The comments section is never enlightening to me. Only a reminder to always view the general public with suspicion.
Come on Joe, it's a really f*cking big deal!
Quote from: Townsend on May 04, 2012, 10:17:14 AM
The comments section is never enlightening to me. Only a reminder to always view the general public with suspicion.
You're not going all "patric" with the paranoia on us now, are you?
Quote from: guido911 on May 04, 2012, 10:34:47 AM
You're not going all "patric" with the paranoia on us now, are you?
Because of the comments section?
Don't tell me you think the commenters online are a valid cross section of mainstream sane people.
They are sauerkraut, friendly bear, shadows.
If you think distrust of those folks makes someone paranoid then your views on things are more skewed than I had ever believed.
Quote from: Townsend on May 04, 2012, 10:40:42 AM
Because of the comments section?
Don't tell me you think the commenters online are a valid cross section of mainstream sane people.
They are sauerkraut, friendly bear, shadows.
If you think distrust of those folks makes someone paranoid then your views on things are more skewed than I had ever believed.
I think the term is 'blatantly biased'...
Reading them is only enlightening in that you see concrete examples of poorly informed, poorly educated, drug addled humanity. It is good to remember that this is the "common man" not the more reasonable folks you often work with. It makes you more aware of your own behavior when you stop to think that the guy you just shook your head at in traffic might be one of them and is reaching for a beatin' stick! I stopped reading them regularly when I mistakenly posted a comment and received vile threats against my well being.
Quote from: guido911 on May 04, 2012, 10:34:47 AM
You're not going all "patric" with the paranoia on us now, are you?
The first couple of times is amusing, but you seem obsessed with personal attacks.
Quote from: patric on May 04, 2012, 11:13:07 AM
The first couple of times is amusing, but you seem obsessed with personal attacks.
You are right you freakin loser. jk. I'll back off.