Posted on 10/06/2007 1:47:46 AM PDT by Paige
Yet, you have no trouble bashing people who ask a question. You should be happy to answer questions relating to your site that you say imparts good information. Is that really to much to ask?
Congratulations on beating the disease. I know from experience it's the hardest thing in the world to do.
As for the site, the site is there for people to go to in order to find answers instead of doing the digging, we do the digging.
Some Rudy fans may not like the site because I do support Fred Thompson with my time, money, my site, and in the grassroots movement.
Well, that was my question from the begining. How can a question be accusatory? I wanted to know where the info came from, nothing more. I meant no disresepect.
BTW, I am with Fred also.
It is not news that Komen gives grants to Planned Parenthood. If you go to google I am sure the documentation will come up.
What has not been confirmed IMO is that Planned Parenthood is using the money for purposes other than specified in the grant. The author asks "how many Planned Parenthood clinics have mammography equipment?" Apparently she doesnt appreciate that it is her responsibility to find out before implying fraud. Moreover, I dont see what the absence of the equipment proves; local PP clinics could do the breast exams and cancer counseling while the actual test is performed by a partner facility.
It would be an egregious violation of their duty for Komen principals to provide money from the foundation knowing that it is being used for purposes far outside its charter. I am not willing to believe this is happening without evidence.
Of course some people believe that no one should have anything to do with PP because they provide abortion services. That's a different issue from whether the Komen money is being used fraudulently.
Ambassador Nancy Goodman Brinker (born December 6, 1946, in Peoria, Illinois) is the founder of Susan G. Komen for the Cure, an organization named after her only sister, Susan, who died from breast cancer in 1980 at age 36. Brinker has helped build Komen by fostering a coalition of relationships within the business community, government, and volunteer sectors in the United States.
On June 18, 2007, President George W. Bush nominated Brinker to be Chief of Protocol of the United States and to have the rank of ambassador and assistant under secretary of state. Brinker was sworn in to the post on September 14, 2007.
In this role, Brinker advises, assists and supports the president of the United States, the vice president and the secretary of state on official matters of diplomatic procedure. She accompanies the president on official visits abroad and serves as the president's personal representative and liaison to the foreign Ambassadors in Washington. Under her direction, the Office of the Chief of Protocol is responsible for activities including the planning, hosting and officiating of ceremonial events for visiting chiefs of state and heads of government, as well as coordinating logistics for the visits. The office also manages Blair House, the president's guesthouse.
____________________________
Those who think this is a person likely to engage in fraud are welcome to their opinion, but I am going to have to disagree.
Then again this may be why they all work together.
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/oct/07100307.html
How does this affect the breast cancer postage stamp that costs more?
I can make no sense of this comment. But I did read that study in its entirety. You can read my opinion on it here, comment 22.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1906890/posts
They don't work in the current White House. And most moonbats with credentials have not survived the intense background check necessary to be appointed to the positions that Nancy Brinker has.
For the record, many Conservatives have been up in arms over some of W's appointments.
Are they up in arms about Nancy Brinker? That is the relevant question.
You are impugning the integrity of one of the most admired women in Washington, D.C. That's your call, but don't be surprised if you end up with egg on your face. You have presented no evidence that these grants are being spent fraudulently.
I’ll stick with what the Catholics have found and trust them long before I’ll trust a politicians or you...my how liberal you are.
Therefore, Go ululate in the wind. The truth always rises to the top above the mire and muck. It is people such as yourself who’d rather hide behind a political nomination rather than seek the truth.
This will be turned over to the bloggers as well as O’Reilly. Once there is more information, a petition will be written and signed for this tax exempt organization to be investigated. Moroever, I’m surprised O’Reilly has not grabbed this sooner since many Catholic organizations are pulling their support.
I have nothing more to say to you for my energies will go into proving the author of this article correct. Now, by all means go hug a tree and pray to the wind we are wrong but know, we are not wrong in this matter.
Charitynavigator.org also gives them high marks, but the BBB is more informative.
The walk/run is just to bring attention to the cause. The part that matters in a monetary sense is that the participants solicit pledges from coworkers, friends and neighbors -- a dollar or a few for every mile, or a fixed amount. The walkers are basically deputized as unpaid fundraisers. If you figure that the average walker in one of these big-city walks has collected twenty bucks (a made-up number; I don't know the actual figure), that's a serious effort, indeed.
History indicates that it works. Think March of Dimes. Is it the most efficient use of labor? No. But it only requires the walkers to commit few hours and their friends to commit a few bucks apiece, so it draws in a lot of people who aren't inclined to commit several hours each week or write a big check. If you choose to give in other ways, I'm certainly not knocking that, but these walks aren't worthless.
At this point, I'm sending all my donations toward the Salvation Army and local charities .
Philosophically, I also like their approach -- the family that moves into the house gets a mortgage, not a deed. Well below market price and market rates, to be sure, but they have a stake. It's not a total handout. (At least in the US -- I don't know about their builds abroad). Oh, and the prospective owner is also required to put in hundreds of hours of "sweat equity" prior to moving in.
That process ensures that the folks who move into a Habitat house are the ones most likely to make the most of the opportunity, those who will make a commitment and who just need a little help to get them out of a bad spot.
Just ignore Jimmy Carter. Habitat is a worthy cause.
Carter is not the founder of Habitat. A lot of folks think he is, because he's how they first heard of it. The founder is Millard Fuller, a remarkable man who happens to live in Americus, Ga., not far from Plains; I don't know if Fuller and Carter knew each other prior to the founding of Habitat. Carter's support, whatever you think of him otherwise, has been all to the good -- it gave them the kind of profile that draws more volunteers and more money.
If this matters to you, Habitat is an avowedly Christian group, but does not discriminate in choosing which families it helps or where it builds.
The Better Business Bureau has a site at give.org that rates charities by their efficiency — how much goes to its work and so on. Charitynavigator.org is another reputable site that rates charities. I’d check both, because they use different criteria and looking at both reports gives a more complete picture.
I don’t know about searching by locality — that might be possible by going through your local BBB chapter.
This sounds terrible, but I never felt inclined to give them anything...now I know why.
Not necessarily. A good national charity has economies of scale that make them more efficient. If the challenge is big enough, like 9/11 or Katrina or the Indian Ocean Tsunami, it takes a big charity like the Red Cross or the Salvation Army to respond.
You also may find opportunites for in-kind contributions or volunteering that may be as valuable to the organization (and more valuable to you) than money.
True dat. You ever know what skills you might have, or for that matter, what stuff. They might need tech hep, or some piece of IT equipment that you've got sitting on a closet shelf.
After my Mom died, we had all her clothes -- not very stylish, but tasteful and professional. Turns out, that's exactly what women's shelters need, because women rebuilding their lives need, and often don't have, something to wear to job interviews.
We found the shelter in town with the best reputation, and dropped off a a couple dozen or so suits, along with matching blouses, and even shoes. They nearly cried. Certainly more effective than just tossing the lot in a Goodwill collection bin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.