What's More Important to You--Our Children or an A Grade from NARAL?

On Monday, President Obama gave a demagogic speech urging Congress to pass gun control legislation.  In doing so, he asked a hypothetical question, "what's more important to you--our children or an A grade from the gun lobby?" True to form, the President posed a false choice. Ironically, in survey research and legal proceedings, the type of question the President posed is known as a double barreled question, meaning the potential answers are not mutually exclusive.  Protecting children and the second amendment are not mutually exclusive. Many NRA-backed politicians and many NRA members fight for the second amendment in part because they wish to be able to defend their children in the same way that the Secret Service is able to defend the President's children.

How about a question that isn't double barreled, Mr. President and your gun control allies? What's more important to you--our children or a Grade A from the abortion lobby? NARAL Pro-Choice America grades politicians on how "pro-choice" they vote, they and endorse candidates.  President Obama received their endorsement for President twice, even before Hillary Clinton dropped out of the race in 2008. Obama is actually more supportive of abortion than NARAL. In 2006, NARAL did not oppose the Born Alive Infant Protection Act that protected children who survived an abortion. While the Senate approved this by a unanimous voice vote, a nearly identical bill had been presented in the Illinois legislature a few years prior, and Obama opposed it as an Illinois state senator.

NARAL has other allies outside of elected office. Planned Parenthood sees NARAL as a "partner for women's health and rights". Despite the claim that these organizations support women's rights, both have opposed a ban on sex-selected abortion.  To them, it is fine for a woman to choose to have an abortion simply because her unborn baby is a girl, yet they claim to stand for women's rights? In their annual report released in January, Planned Parenthood indicated that they performed a record number of abortions in 2011 and nearly a million abortions from when President Obama took office in 2009 through the end of 2011. The media are pro-choice in their coverage of these horrors of abortion, and they often choose not to cover it. Meanwhile, some media outlets choose to consider children as collectively "ours" as society, not as children who belong to their parents.  First things first, however, in order for children to "belong to us "or to their parents, they cannot belong to the medical waste bin. What's more important to you?

Crossposted here and here.

Projection, Class Warfare, the Left and Governor Palin

A vile, depraved post on Leftist blog regarding Trig Palin's recent birthday was rightfully lambasted throughout the conservative blogosphere yesterday from Gateway Pundit to Big Journalism and beyond (even the liberal Mediaite). Blog postings, in addition to tweets, led to a massive new media effort, #trigscrew, to call advertisers at this Leftist blog to remove their ads. Due to a blast of tweets alerting them to their product being advertised on the Leftist blog, several companies have indeed lifted their advertising. It has revealed the Left for who they are, and it's all the more sweet that the fusion of the free market and social media has made such an impact on the Left's transparent agenda.

The Left claims to be for the proverbial little guy, butobviously not when it is this little guy. They are not only ideologically progressive, they are also projectionists-- attacking conservatives for what they themselves are exhibiting. Actions speak louder than words, so the saying goes, but for many of these projectionists, they only have words. Such is the case here. However, this misplaced projection and false accusations extend beyond the Left-to-Right blogosphere. Politicians on the Left and progressive pundits have accused Governor Palin of being a puppet for big corporation--and have played the class warfare card. Progressives should learn from history (even from across the Pond) about what happens when you play the class warfare card with a strong conservative woman:

In her Madison Tea Party rally speech on Saturday, Governor Palin called out the Left for engaging in "class warfare and fearmongering":

And when Wisconsin’s own Paul Ryan presented a plan for fiscal reform, what was Obama’s response? He demonized the voices of responsibility with class warfare and with fearmongering. And I say personally to our president: Hey, parent to parent, Barack Obama, for shame for you to suggest that the heart of the commonsense conservative movement would do anything to harm our esteemed elders, to harm our children with Down syndrome, to harm those most in need. No, see, in our book, you prioritize appropriately and those who need the help will get the help. The only way we do that is to be wise and prudent and to budget according to the right priorities.

These are the words of a woman whose actions have matched her words. As Governor, Palin budgeted wisely, prudently,and according to the right priorities.Her prudent budgeting has been well documented. She vetoed hundreds of millions of dollars in unneeded spending, rejected stimulus funding that would not be effective in Alaska's climate, and removed duplicated federal/state funding from her budgets. At the same time, Governor Palin's tenure included implementing a Senior Benefits program for low income elders. She also increased funding for students with disabilities in rural schools and increased funding for special needs education. Overall, she increased special needs funding by 175%. The very things that Governor Palin called for are the very things that she has done during her political career. She prioritized and budgeted accordingly.

Meanwhile,the Obama administration's health care "reform" legislation disallows families from using flexible spending accounts (which is the family's own money) for special needs education. He also employs a health care adviser who believes in that health care should be distributed by their "productivity in society" and their "potential to live a complete life". Additionally, President Obama and the liberals in Washington D.C. support spending money that we don't have to fund Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry, ignoring the fact Planned Parenthood turned a more than billion profit as a non-profit entity in 2008. Governor Palin, of course, is opposed to such funding stating in part:

We recognize that not only is our country buried under Mt. McKinley-sized debt, but that the truest measure of any society is how it treats those who are least able to defend and speak for themselves.

What does this say about our society? The Left uses Trig Palin as a prop for their hatred of Governor Palin, while wrongly accusing Governor Palin of using Trig as a political prop. They try to fear monger and accuse conservatives of destroying entitlement programs, when it is their mindsets that contribute to policies supportive of rationing of care by panels like Independent Payment Advisory Board that affects Medicare reimbursement and treatment. They accuse conservatives of not caring for the elderly and those with special needs, when it's their rhetoric and policies that are uncaring.They are progressive projectionists. I think I'll stick with the ideas and character of the woman not only has her political rhetoric match her policies, but who also had the courage and compassion to do something 90% of mothers in her situation don't do.

Crossposted here, here, and here.

My Dream Solution to Susan G. Komen's Misuse of Donors' Dollars

Today, a story was posted at the Daily Caller that indicated that money donated to Susan G.Komen, an organization that funds breast cancer research, has given money to Planned Parenthood:

According to Hammarley, about 20 of Komen’s 122 affiliates are responsible for the money that goes to Planned Parenthood and that those funds are used only for breast cancer treatment, education, or screening programs that happen to be affiliated with the abortion group.

“Those funds are audited twice a year to make sure that the money that is invested from the Komen affiliate is being used for screening, treatment or education of breast cancer only,” Hammarley said. “If they ever find that it is either intermingled with their general fund or used specifically for something else, it is shut down. Legal action
is taken and the program is required to pay back the money.”

Hammarley went on to state that such action has never been taken.

In FY 2009 Komen affiliates contributed about $7.5 million to programs sponsored by Planned Parenthood. “That $7.5 million is less than one percent of the entire amount of community grant funding that affiliates around the country contribute,” Hammarley said.

But to people like Bordlee, the amount is insignificant. It is the principle of it. “No matter whether they are giving $500,000 a year to Planned Parenthood, or $5, people who respect the dignity of human life and are trying to save people with disease don’t want any part of their money going to an organization that is subsidizing an abortion provider,” she said.

Yes, Planned Parenthood claims that they audit the funds they receive from Komen and ensure they are only for screenings and education. However, there is always the chance that funds will be misappropriated. Additionally, when individuals donate money to an organization, they do so trusting that those funds will be used to fulfill the purposes of that organization, not funneled to a different organization (especially an organization founded by someone who believes in eugenics). If some really wanted to give to Planned Parenthood to fund screenings performed by them, they are welcomed to do so. Although I definitely don't support what Planned Parenthood does, with the current laws, it is still legal. Therefore, people still have the freedom to donate to this organization directly if they wish.

On a personal note, when I first sat down with my thesis adviser in grad school, I told her that I wanted to do a project on breast cancer in rural areas. Her exact words were, " I know you want to save the world, but you can't do it with your master's thesis". I went away feeling a bit disappointed, but I also realized perhaps it was too ambitious of a goal for a master's thesis. However, it still remained a bit of a dream of mine.

Last year, my boss at the time, who had always allowed me some independence, allowed me to draft a project on if rural-urban disparities existed in mammography and if distance from available mammography affected what stage breast cancer was detected in. It was second grant application I had ever written. I knew it was not likely to be funded. My boss signed on as the primary investigator, and as a rheumatologist, he didn't have breast cancer expertise, and as one of the other people listed on the grant was only two years removed from graduate school with only one publication under my belt. The grant did make it past the preliminary stage, but not the final stage. Our grant returned unfunded with a good deal of constructive criticism, as I still have a lot to learn about the ins and outs of research study design.

There were probably several other projects more well designed than ours that didn't get funded as well. Couldn' t they have received the money given to Planned Parenthood? The story reported that $7.5 million of Komen money was given to Planned Parenthood. A lot of research projects are granted a quarter million dollars to cover a two year study. With the money given to Planned Parenthood in FY2009 alone, thirty two-year research studies could have been funded.

Breast cancer research and eradication has always been something close to my heart. My great grandmother passed away from breast cancer in the 1960s before they had the necessary tools for early detection and treatment. A good friend's mom had it when she was in her thirties. Two people I've come to know through political blogging have had it (one recently passing on to God). With this deeply saddening news, it only reaffirms my desire to do one of the things on my "bucket list". While I've wanted to start a health care funding organization that doesn't fund projects that use embryonic stem cells, I now want to extend that mission to ensure that people would have an organization they could feel comfortable contributing to that does not funnel its funds to an organization that also funds abortions. It is a needed alternative.