Komen Apologizes; Planned Parenthood Accepts Apology

Komen sez "never mind":

We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women's lives. [. . .] Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation. We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair.

Our only goal for our granting process is to support women and families in the fight against breast cancer. Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process. We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.

Planned Parenthood accepted the apology:

In recent weeks, the treasured relationship between the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation and Planned Parenthood has been challenged, and we are now heartened that we can continue to work in partnership toward our shared commitment to breast health for the most underserved women. We are enormously grateful that the Komen Foundation has clarified its grantmaking criteria, and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Komen partners, leaders and volunteers. What these past few days have demonstrated is the deep resolve all Americans share in the fight against cancer, and we honor those who are at the helm of this battle.
< NY AG Schneiderman Sues Big Banks On MERS | Anonymous Releases Secret Conference Call Between FBI and UK Police >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Yeah (5.00 / 7) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 11:46:54 AM EST
    but you can't put the genie back in the bottle. I have found out so much about Komen these past few days that I will no longer participate in anything they sponsor.

    Ditto. (5.00 / 6) (#7)
    by Towanda on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:10:22 PM EST
    And as the Komen run in my town is near my house, the run that raised a million dollars here alone, I will actively work to alert a lot of women (and others) I know to all that I have learned of late about the organization's claims regarding allocation of funds for research.

    We have alternative organizations, after all.


    Alternative organizations (none / 0) (#47)
    by womanwarrior on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 04:25:09 PM EST
    Anybody got suggestions about who else funds research for women's cancers who puts less into administration, lobbying and politics than Komen?

    I think PP handled this brilliantly, by the way.  Hope it scares off those who are after them for awhile.  


    Exactly What I thought... (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:59:21 PM EST
    ...the genie is out.

    When I flipped on the telly, Michael Bloomberg was announcing a huge donation and I was thinking, this clown is going to support the decision, but before the though finalized, he says it's going to PP, to help make up the discrepancy.

    I did a double take, and it started sinking in how big this had become.

    I suspect the people at PP couldn't be happier, especially after the years of non-sense they been enduring from the right, they have gotten some grand endorsements/donations , insane amounts of free publicity, and they donation is back.

    Talk about an issue with backlash, the anti-whatever nincompoops over on the right are probably livid, years and years of organized denigration of PP's reputation, gone in in an instant.

    And best of all, a shame of grand proportions was revealed.  I was honestly shocked yesterday with what I leaned yesterday.  And although I don't make direct donations, I do support lots of walk/run folks, which included several pink ribbon events last year.  I will certainly be a little more vigilant this year in making sure these clowns don't get my support.  And let them know who is behind their event, which I suspect are going to dry up very quickly.


    Me too (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by Madeline on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 01:18:28 PM EST
    ..all about their funding, percentages on administration cost vs research, backgrounds Karen Handel, political donations made by Brinker....I have a hugh file on everything Komen.

    I feel a little sleazy that I discovered so much that I really now do not want to know.


    and don't forget some of their (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 01:31:47 PM EST
    icky doings like BPA denial, tamoxifen recommended as a preventive, fighting against Medicaid funding for BC TREATMENT. And the list goes on.

    Apparently not that much goes (none / 0) (#58)
    by MKS on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 10:10:32 PM EST
    to research.....Something like 10%.

    It is a good example (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Edger on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 11:58:34 AM EST
    of how unquestioned support for anyone is counterproductive to getting good results from them, and of how public pressure and loss of support is productive...

    And they say nothing about future funding (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by msaroff on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 11:58:56 AM EST
    So they will just zero fund them next year.

    Seriously, Komen is a scam that pays its executives bloated salaries, spends twice as much on PR as it grants, and is run by right wing hacks.

    Don't give, and don't buy products from companies that pinkwash their products through them.

    Current funding? (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by waldenpond on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 01:12:43 PM EST
    I don't see how this changes the current situation.  Clarifying 'riminal not political investigation' seems to still create the situation they want to deny funding to PP.

    Sort of. (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by Addison on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:00:08 PM EST
    Komen has pledged to continue the grants to Planned Parenthood that have already been awarded (they didn't have much choice there, and were already doing this). Parsing Komen's statement, they have merely said that PP will be eligible for grants in the future as long as no one files "conclusive" criminal charges against PP.

    So my guess is someone will soon file criminal charges against them. Or the grants will be phased out using more subtle and gradual rationales. Perhaps individual Komen state chapters will be able to bar certain grantee organizations from consideration? Or new restrictions on the grant itself (rather than a blanket ban on the organization) will make PP ineligible?

    Meh (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:06:02 PM EST
    And go through this all over again?

    I doubt it.


    Well... (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Addison on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:09:13 PM EST
    ...that's why it'd be gradual. Let the local chapters decide. Or reduce the funding for the grants wherein PP is eligible and create a new and expanding class of funding where they aren't. There are many ways to slowly boil a frog. People need to be vigilant. That they were absurdly stupid once is not a guarantee they won't be again. In fact, I'd say being absurdly stupid once increases the chances one will be absurdly stupid again -- ideological stupidity doesn't learn to be smart, it adapts to be more successfully stupid.

    Mebbe (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:12:38 PM EST
    But the reality is PP should be weaning itself off of Komen anyway.

    The embryonic stem cell research prohibition is a sticking point for me with Komen.


    I did read today from my local chapter (none / 0) (#13)
    by Towanda on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:36:01 PM EST
    a lot that indicates that the locals are reeling from this.  I can see the possibilities that you suggest being taken by the locals -- or their members leave.  There are good alternative orgs.

    The Jig is Up... (none / 0) (#18)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 01:09:43 PM EST
    ...with what came out yesterday, the only money they will have to grant will be from the far right and will be peanuts compared to what they were getting.

    This will be their last of it for PP, they simply aren't going to have the coffers, and the new donors will want them funding only garbage science for corporations that shows no correlation between their products and cancer, like they are currently doing with BPA.


    Whoa, there... (none / 0) (#38)
    by Addison on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:52:27 PM EST
    Who said anything about the criminal charges being abortion-related? I'm sure any ginned up financial crime or any number of non-abortion related "crimes" would work just as well.

    And If that Doesn't Work... (5.00 / 0) (#41)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:12:19 PM EST
    ... Breitbart can just dust off the pimp costume.

    Greg Sargent says this (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:15:26 PM EST
    I just got off the phone with a Komen board member, and he confirmed that the announcement does not mean that Planned Parenthood is guaranteed future grants -- a demand he said would be "unfair" to impose on Komen. He also said the job of the group's controversial director, Nancy Brinker, is safe, as far as the board is concerned.

    Let the chips for feminists and women that care about each other fall where they may!

    Heh! Someone put this up too (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:17:02 PM EST
    under a pink ribbon.

    Komen Foundation's 'new' position:
    Stop criticizing us and buy our pink crap!


    Considering how little funding (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:09:48 PM EST
    Planned Parenthood receives from Komen, what Komen did and how all this has shown a light on all the  Komen scamming, we all need to stop giving our money to Komen.  We need to find other foundations to support, and does Planned Parenthood hold any "runs" to raise funds for the working poor they give breast screenings to?  This was all such a wakeup call to the whole country.  I had no idea how very little money Komen gives to planned parenthood to service the poor at risk women in this country.

    Did I ever tell you about (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by sj on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 10:18:26 PM EST
    the idea I had for a Planned Parenthood fund drive?   I used to work not far from the PP in Denver that was the daily target of the most heinous sort of protesters.  I was talking to friends about it and we had the idea that for one month we could pledge X dollars per day per protester.  Then PP could put a sign saying how much they had pledged/received in donations the day before courtesy of the protesters outside.  

    I left Denver a week or two later and so I never actually reached out to PP to see if they would go for it, but it still seems like a good idea to me.


    That is a great idea! (none / 0) (#62)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 11:42:26 PM EST
    The Planned Parenthood that services the Colorado Springs area gets pretty hard at times too.  I would love something like that.

    Martinis CAN sometimes (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by sj on Sat Feb 04, 2012 at 12:08:57 AM EST
    be a creative influence.

    read: everyone be quiet now, but we reserve (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by cpinva on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:20:41 PM EST
    the right to cut off any future funding.

    sorry, i don't trust these people. no funds will ever be donated to them by me.

    They have sadly become one of those (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:30:28 PM EST
    nonprofits that are mostly about generating a nice fat salary for its hierarchy.  It was time they were exposed and now it is time for them to be appropriately marginalized and their board left to drain off what is left of any assets and run it into the ground!  Or maybe Focus on the Family can keep them on life support but I doubt it?  These fatcats have big needs now.

    They had it made once though.  We all coughed it up for the pink ribbon.  It was only lately, when everything had a pink ribbon slapped on it, that I realized I might be in the presence of scammers and con women.  And wow, I was


    Even my local Vons grocery store. (none / 0) (#64)
    by oculus on Sat Feb 04, 2012 at 12:58:22 PM EST
    After you swipe your card, $1 to pink ribbon people?  

    The people have spoken.... (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by kdog on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:39:07 PM EST
    power to the people.

    If only our elected representation was this receptive to tour voices, and so fast!

    But I hear you guys when you say you can't put the genie back in the bottle, their image has suffered (rightly so) and have opened themselves up to scrutiny as to how they dole out the donations given to them (rightly so).

    Turns out to be a home run for PP, increased donations from the public and they get the Komen money after all.

    And (5.00 / 4) (#43)
    by christinep on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:23:09 PM EST
    One of the other good results is that a lot of information about the many services provided by Planned Parenthood has been effectively transmitted.  The mischaracterization of PP by the far right may actually have been righted (as in "corrected") as the news media spelled out in each broadcast the many family roles of the organization.

    Again, the overreach from the Right via Komen has erased a portion of the methodical undermining against PP. Maybe $$$ can't buy everything...hoo, ha.


    Yes... (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by kdog on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:31:14 PM EST
    a very necessary reminder that Planned Parenthood does so much more than abortion.

    I took advantage of the free condoms available at Planned Parenthood when I was a younger poorer man, and I went with an old flame for low-cost birth control.  I've got nothing but nice things to say about the organization...it does feel like we've turned the tables on PP's adversaries.  

    Smells like victory around here!


    If PP (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:54:55 PM EST
    If PP knows how to play their cards, they'll file a whole bunch of grants.  Let's see Komen turn them down....

    Well, (5.00 / 3) (#20)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 01:15:54 PM EST
    It honestly makes me ill to link to KOS, but this is a really good diary that gives a GREAT example of how even if Komen continues to fund PP, they are just nasty.

      Personally I think it's almost cruel to fund  detection and then leave disadvantaged people to their own devices to find treatment, especially if you ALSO fight AGAINST government funding for treatment....

    Anyway, the link, the link:


    It's disgusting (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:16:12 PM EST
    Honestly, no self respecting woman should buy another pink dipped POS ever again.

    I am (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:19:41 PM EST
    proud to say that I was anti-Komen before it was cool....

    I was kind of neutralish (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:22:16 PM EST
    I never went out of my way to buy any particular pink thing and I've not lived where they hold a run.  But it did inspire me to purchase a couple of pink things when I was shopping for a specific item and it came in breast cancer cure pink.  I KNOW NOW, I KNOW THINGS

    then there is me (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by CST on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:28:41 PM EST
    Not a fan of that pink.  So I didn't buy it.

    But I did donate to planned parenthood.

    Now I can pat myself on the back and say it was a moral decision I made, when the reality is I just don't like that shade of pink and knew more about planned parenthood than komen.


    they're getting a little huffy, I think... (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Anne on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:28:19 PM EST
    The hubris comes off this guy in waves...

    From Greg Sargant (bold is mine):

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

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

    Pushed on whether this means the new announcement wasn't really a reversal, Raffaelli pushed back, arguing that Komen, in response to all the criticism, had removed politics from the grant-making process. "Is it really unclear that we're changing the policy to address criticism?" he said.

    I don't think the gentleman was expecting the SGK bamboozle to be as transparent as it's turning out to be.

    In light of some of the things that have come out in the last couple days, I'm finding it almost laughable this high moral ground of "humanitarian" mission SGK has climbed up on.  Does this mean that Planned Parenthood's commitment to women's health, and in particular its efforts to help low-income women, might not be humanitarian enough?

    How long before someone digs up the other recipients of SGK's largesse and finds them, shall we say, wanting?  Or highly conflicted?  Or with deep corporate and political connections?

    Here's hoping that those who support finding a cure for breast cancer, and are committed to women's health issues, will reject the SGK corporate model and form an organization that will build on the energy this incident has generated, and do so in a non-political, non-ideological way.

    Oh, shoot - I forgot the link. (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Anne on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:29:11 PM EST
    everyone we are piling on (none / 0) (#37)
    by smott on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:46:22 PM EST
    Much of the impetus for the PP and embryonic stem funding cutoff came from Karen Handel a VP hired last year. She's a right wing nut who ran a failed GA senate (iirc) campaign with an anti-pp platform.

    Obviously denying BPA link is off the reservation but I thought they were up front about pediatric exposure being bad and unclear if normal levels were a cancer risk for adults.

    Hope someone can provide links to this....and also re Tamox reccommendation. It had hugely promoising early results and everyone was on the bandwagon. But if KF was still touting it after say 2003 then yes that wold be bad indeed.

    This is a nearly 100 mil charitable org.
    Brinkers salary is 400K at least last I saw.
    They provide hundreds of thousands of free mammos a year to at risk women.

    I stop short of piling on the demonization here.

    If they fire Handel and bring back Mollie Williams I will bring out my pink Race teeshirts again.


    The scientific community (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:01:19 PM EST
    is clear about the adult BPA risk.  It's only Komen and industry that are foggy.

    And Tamox, they still have their pdf on their web site.  Go find it.

    They provide the free mammos (own stock in mammo company), while as wingers, they fight Medicaid funding for treatment.  


    where is the info (none / 0) (#42)
    by smott on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:13:34 PM EST
    Re fighting Medicaid treatment? That seems off the wall.

    Teresa's first comment (none / 0) (#60)
    by sj on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 10:38:51 PM EST
    linked to a DKos diary that had a link.  Here it is directly.


    Jeralyn, sorry for the direct link (even though it's short).  Firefox has completely messed up all the editing attributes and now just shows the markup instead of rendering it.


    The apology should have (none / 0) (#54)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 06:59:36 PM EST
    included, or at least be quickly followed by, a boot given to Karen Handel, who as you note ran a failed campaign for governor of Georgia with a big chip on her shoulder, called Planned Parenthood.   In the absence of that, Planned Parenthood should be gracious, as it has been, but work toward replacing that source of funding so as to facilitate its own autonomy.

    Karen (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 07:06:15 PM EST
    Handel has single handedly destroyed the Komen brand. Before no one really paid all that much attention to what they did (people probably should have but didn't) had corporate sponsors and a lot of participation. Now what? Handel in her desire to force a radical right agenda has completely destroyed the brand and now Komen is just another nut job type PAC that nobody will want to do business with.

    Yes, the fruits of fanaticism. (none / 0) (#56)
    by KeysDan on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 07:39:13 PM EST
    It's clear (5.00 / 0) (#40)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:10:31 PM EST
    That this apology was just a new strategy....

    1. invent new policy that justifies dropping PP
    2. failure, then say that dropping PP was about minimizing passthrough grants.
    3. failure, okay then say that PP is eligible for new grants...then create better new policy the prevents the acceptance of the grant apps. Meanwhile, confuse the issue so people don't know what you said, and they will develop their own conclusions.  In other words, pull an Obama.

    Done.  This gives Komen a few months of people saying, "can't you accept their apology" and make people who still say they're slime look like the bad guys.

    This is a brilliant PR strategy..but sorry, they are still slime.

    You should never... (none / 0) (#15)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 12:47:46 PM EST
    go full wing-nut.

    As you will find out (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Towanda on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 01:40:26 PM EST
    that h*ll hath seen nothin' like the fury of millions of women scorned.

    I hope so (none / 0) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:20:04 PM EST
    I'm so visual, everytime I see that particular shade of pink now I think "help women who have breast cancer".  But it wasn't about that, they weren't about helping women who had breast cancer.  Their President is creepy too, she looks like the Elvira of Family Values. Not to hack on Elvira too much.

    Nancy (none / 0) (#31)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:21:20 PM EST
    I said yesterday that Nancy Brinker looks surprisingly like Steven Tyler.  They must have the same plastic surgeon.

    I think she is a pretty woman (none / 0) (#33)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 02:26:50 PM EST
    But when I discover a filthy hearted selfish woman in a pretty package it really creeps me out.  When you are pretty, you do get "extras" in this life.  It is dishonest to say differently.  When I discover though that someone took advantage of that plus, and used it in disgusting ways....well then they super disgust me.  They could have done so much more if their heart and soul weren't filthy and allowed to be so simply because they could away with it and prosper.

    Elvira is an iconic good kind of creepy though and the other side of the coin is iconic nasty creepy Nancy :)


    Cassandra Peterson's format (none / 0) (#65)
    by The Addams Family on Sat Feb 04, 2012 at 04:56:33 PM EST
    was in turn nicked from Ghoulardi (Ernie Anderson), a late-night 1960s-era TV persona (& the father of film director Paul Thomas Anderson) well known to those of us in the Cleveland diaspora

    that format may well have been nicked from others as well


    What am I missing? (none / 0) (#45)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:48:48 PM EST
    Aren't we talking about two private charitable organizations here?   Why should Komen not be allowed to give their money to whoever they want to?

    Why sort of moral highground does PP occupy where they can threaten like Jesse Jackson to extract bribe money to keep them quiet?

    Notwithstanding what Komen did was stupid and poorly handled but the brooha ha seems a little misguided.   Komen should be able to do whatever they want with their money and I don't like to celebrate bribery even if it's based loosely on some sort of better principal.

    bribery? (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by CST on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 03:55:53 PM EST
    Yes Komen can do what they want with their money.  And people can choose to give it elsewhere.

    It's not bribery, people just chose to give it elsewhere, and they wanted that money still so they changed their position.

    Komen is not entitled to anyone's charitable donations.

    It was the public that revolted.  In the form of $$, and $$ talks.


    Some of it is a kind a charitable laziness too (none / 0) (#48)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 04:31:47 PM EST
    I always wanted to believe that when I bought pink things, they helped everyone.  I wanted to believe that their entire reason for being was to help women with breast cancer.  That isn't true, now it is only "certain" women and now some suspect they may have been lobbying for certain women to not even be able to receive the treatment after detection they all deserve.

    I did begin to suspect though that the organization itself was coming off the rails as far as having a truly "humanitarian" goal when everything under the sun became pinked.  Begins to smack of trying to become so "funded" that now all the big shots need themselves a great big bonus because they are all working so hard to sell their brand to make big money so that they can get a great big bonus.

    When I found out how little money they were even giving Planned Parenthood I then began to wonder where all the money has been going.


    PP did more then simply rely on the (none / 0) (#49)
    by Slado on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 04:41:24 PM EST
    public outrage.   They went public with their displeasure but still.  Why do they deserve the money?

    Look I'm all for people funding both charities, actually I'd lean more towards PP abecause I think charities like Komen are more about marketing then actually accomplishing good but lets all be honest here about what this was about.

    An over reaction on both sides fueled by the partisanship surrounding abortion.


    You ask why PP deserved the money (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by sj on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 10:45:32 PM EST
    The same question can be asked of Komen.  Why do they deserve the money?  The public had a perception of the goals and motives of Komen.  Turns out that was false.  The public is entitled to withhold their money as well.  

    And this situation gave Planned Parenthood the opportunity to highlight all the other ways they contribute to women's health.  Why shouldn't they take it?  Komen wasn't REQUIRED to reinstate the grant.  They did it to stop the bleeding of their OWN funding and the related bad press.


    I think that you are (none / 0) (#53)
    by call me Ishmael on Fri Feb 03, 2012 at 06:54:30 PM EST
    being far to generous to Komen.  Yes, it is true that they are a private organization but they have rules about how to dispense grants and it seems pretty clear that having had an anti-abortion person added to their inner circle they suddenly created a new regulation that allowed them to turn down Planned Parenthood without it seeming to be their choice.  So it was misleading at best and simply dishonest at worst.

    But I have also read--if someone knows if this is accurate I would appreciate having it confirmed or denied--that in fact they had approved future grants for PP and that that was what was really withdrawn.  If so there is a gap between what they are already in the midst of funding, the way they have handled the present grant cycle, and their hope to hide their non-funding in the future.


    How about no more support for Pink (none / 0) (#67)
    by Jlvngstn on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 09:32:02 PM EST
    until they tell Handel to take a walk?