Penn State Defends Michael Mann From Coal-Powered
Intimidation

Yesterday, ThinkProgress Green revealed an intimidation campaign by a coal-industry PAC against climate scientist Michael Mann, who is scheduled to speak on February 9 about the climate challenge at the Penn State Speakers Forum. “Penn State has a deep and profound commitment to the First Amendment and the principles of free speech and expression,” Penn State spokesperson told the Guardian, responding to the long-running campaign against Mann’s work. “There are no plans to cancel his speaking engagement. Michael Mann’s research has undergone several rigorous national reviews and investigations and in each case his work has been upheld.?

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

JC Penny Is Standing By Ellen, Ignores Anti-Gay
Group

JC Penny is standing strong against an anti-gay group calling on it to terminate its partnership with Ellen DeGeneres, Andy Towle reports. “In an emailed statement to Yahoo Shine, J.C. Penney confirmed it “stands behind its partnership with Ellen DeGeneres,” as do most Americans. More than 10,000 people have “signed a petition drawn up by GLAAD to support Ellen, and 95 percent of the L.A. Times readers supported JC Penney hiring Ellen in a poll.” The company’s commitment is just another indication of how times — and attitudes — have changed. Back in 1997, JC Penney did respond to pressure from the American Family Association and pulled its sponsorship of The Ellen Show after DeGeneres and her sitcom character Ellen Morgan came out as gay.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Grassley Suggests LGBT People Aren’t
Discriminated Against At Shelters

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced an LGBT-inclusive version of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (VAWA), which aims to protect victims and survivors of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Before it passed along party lines, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) objected to the protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity, suggesting they were simply unnecessary:

GRASSLEY: The Leahy substitute would prohibit discrimination by grantees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Of course, I agree that shelters and other grant recipients should provide services equally to everyone. But advocates of this provision haven?t produced data that shelters have refused to provide services for these reasons. This is true even after we were told they would send a report on the subject. The provision is a solution in search of a problem. Instead, it is only a political statement that shouldn?t be made on a bill that is designed to address actual needs of victims.

Grassley is wrong on two counts. First, there are plenty of troubling data to show why the protections are necessary. The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) both published studies last year that demonstrate how LGBT people have been refused protection by shelters:

• In 2010, 44.6 percent of LGBT/HIV-positive survivors of intimate partner violence were turned away from shelters (NCAVP).
• More than half of survivors (54.4 percent) were denied orders of protection (NCAVP).
• 29 percent of homeless transgender people have been turned away by shelters (NGLTF).
• 6 percent of transgender people report being denied equal access to domestic violence shelters and programs (NGLTF).

The other count on which Grassley is wrong is his basic reasoning. In this statement, he basically asserted that LGBT people have to first face discrimination before they deserve to be protected from it. One wonders how much “data” he expects the LGBT community to endure before he’ll deem it worthy of his compassion.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Planned Parenthood's Effort To Fight All Types Of
Cancer Still Under Attack

Following the controversy surrounding Susan G. Komen for the Cure's initial announcement that it would end its relationship with Planned Parenthood, right-wing media have tried to downplay Planned Parenthood's efforts to fight cancer, claiming that Planned Parenthood doesn't provide mammograms and does "nothing to prevent breast cancer." But this ignores the numerous cancer-related services Planned Parenthood annually provides to women -- including more than 1.5 million cancer screenings and preventative services in 2010 -- such as breast exams, mammogram referrals, and screenings for other types of cancer; moreover, contrary to right-wing claims, some Planned Parenthood clinics do indeed provide mammograms.

"They Don't Even Do Mammograms":Right-Wing Media Downplay Planned Parenthood's EffortsTo Fight Cancer

Fox's Sandy Rios: Planned Parenthood Does "Nothing To Prevent BreastCancer. They Don't Even Do Mammograms." On the February 2 edition of FoxNews' America Live, host Megyn Kelly discussed Komen's decision to endPlanned Parenthood funding with Fox News contributors Sandy Rios and JehmuGreene. Rios claimed:"I think it's a fabulous decision. ... They do nothing to prevent breast cancer.They don't even do mammograms." Rios also added, "They're taking money fromSusan G. Komen under false pretenses." [Fox News, America Live, 2/2/12]

Weekly Standard: Planned Parenthood "L[ied] AboutProviding Mammograms." A February 2 Weekly Standard post claimedthat Planned Parenthood's president has "falsely claim[ed] on nationaltelevision that the group provides mammograms." From thepost:

Last spring,Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards went on CNN and claimed that ifCongress cut off funding to Planned Parenthood "millionsof women are going to lose access, not to abortion services, to basic familyplanning, you know, mammograms." But as pro-life activist Lila Rosedocumented in a video, Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms.

This story isworth recalling in light of the news this week that the Susan G. Komenfoundation, one of the nation's largest breast cancer charities, has cut offfunding (more than $600,000) to Planned Parenthood. Cecile Richards wrotethat the foundation's decision to "end its support of lifesaving breastcancer screening at Planned Parenthood health centers comes as a blow to womenacross America."

[...]

Now obviouslyPlanned Parenthood's role as America's largest abortion practitioner seems tobe a significant factor in Komen's decision. Many Americans who would like tofund breast cancer research without lining the pockets of abortionists havepushed Komen to end its Planned Parenthood grants in recent years.

But why doesPlanned Parenthood feel entitled to a private charity's donations, especiallyconsidering the fact that Planned Parenthood's president falsely claims onnational television that the group provides mammograms? Isn't Komen free togive its money to organizations that do more than provide mammogram"referrals" and breast cancer screenings? [The Weekly Standard,

[Planned Parenthood Action Fund, 1/31/12, viaTwitter]

Planned Parenthood: "Low-IncomeWomen" Are At "Immediate Risk" If Komen Ends Planned ParenthoodFunding. In aresponse to Komen's decision on its website, Planned Parenthood stated:

Atimmediate risk are low-income women, many located in rural and underservedcommunities, served by 19 Planned Parenthood programs funded by the KomenFoundation. This funding has enabled designated Planned Parenthood healthcenters to provide women with breast health education, screenings, andreferrals for mammograms -- lifesaving care for women where Planned Parenthoodis their only source of health care. [PlannedParenthood.org, accessed

[PlannedParenthood.org, Affilate Services Summary, accessed 2/3/12]

Contrary To Claims,Some PPFA Clinics Indeed ProvideMammograms -- Thanks To Grants From Komen

As Of March 2011, Texas Planned Parenthood Clinics Did OfferMammograms -- "Through Grants From The ... Susan G. Komen Foundation." In aMarch 2011 statement to Media Matters, Felicia Chase Goodman, CEO ofPlanned Parenthood of Central Texas, said:

Planned Parenthoodof Central Texas is proud to provide comprehensive breast cancer screening forour patients, including mammography when needed. Through grants from theCentral Texas affiliate of the Susan G. Komen Foundation and our participationin the Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening (BCCS) program (through the TexasDepartment of State Health Services), PPCT provides referrals and pays formammograms and diagnostic follow up treatment for our patients at arearadiology and surgical clinics.  

Through these grants,in 2010 PPCT patients received 609 screening mammograms and 125 diagnosticmammograms; breast cancer was detected in 20 women. For most of these patients,Planned Parenthood is their only healthcare provider. 

Through ourparticipation in the BCCS program, patients who are diagnosed with breast orcervical cancer can be enrolled in the Medicaid for Breast and Cervical Cancer(MBCC) program, which ensures that they receive the necessary treatment tofight cancer. [Media Matters, 3/31/11]

Waco, TX, PlannedParenthood Has Provided More Than 2,000 Mammograms Since 2001. From a Waco, TX, Planned Parenthood Newsletter:

In 2009 we provided487 mammograms and 162 diagnostic follow-up procedures for our patients. Sincethis program began in 2001, we have provided 2,683 mammograms to low-incomewomen. [Waco Planned Parenthood, Spring/Summer 2010]

TexasDepartment Of State Health Services Lists Planned Parenthood Clinics As BreastCancer Service Providers.  The Texas Department of State HealthServices includes Planned Parenthood of Central Texas in Waco in its list ofBreast and Cervical Cancer Services providers. [Breast & Cervical Cancer Services Clinic Locator, accessed 2/2/12]

Tucson, AZ, PlannedParenthood Hosted "Free Mobile Mammography Clinic." From Planned Parenthood's Website:

Planned ParenthoodArizona will host a free mobile mammography clinic, supported byPink365. Mammography has proven to be the single most beneficial tool indetecting early and treatable cancer. The goal of screening exams,such as mammograms, is to find cancers early before it has a chance to grow andtreatment works best. [PlannedParenthood.org, 8/07/09]

This Is NothingNew: Right-Wing Media Have Long Pushed Smears AndFalsehoods About Planned Parenthood

For right-wing smears and falsehoodsabout Planned Parenthood, SEE HERE.

Read The Full Article:
http://feeds.mediamatters.org/~r/mediamatters/latest/~3/w_UU4crqK5w/201202030006

Add to del.icio.us   Digg this   Post to Furl   Add to reddit   Add to myYahoo!

Lazy media reports Komen Foundation decision as
'reversal.' It isn't.

Komen Foundation's 'new' position:
Stop criticizing us and buy our pink crap!Earlier today, the news broke that the Komen Foundation had issued an apology for its decision to stop funding cancer screen and prevention at Planned Parenthood. The apology was nothing more than an attempt to control the damage done to the Komen brand, but the traditional media nonetheless did the work for the foundation by reporting it as a reversal of the Komen Foundation's decision.

But it's not.

Greg Sargent reports:

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.

Right. So in other words, the foundation's announcement isn't reversing anything at all.

Further:

Pushed on whether this means the new announcement wasn?t really a reversal, [Komen board member John] Raffelli 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.

Yes, it really is unclear. The Komen Foundation needs to state unequivocally that it will continue its long practice of working with Planned Parenthood; otherwise, this looks like nothing more than an attempt to try to change the narrative and the non-stop negative headlines about the foundation's politicizing of breast cancer prevention.

Oh, and one more thing:

Asked if Brinker?s job was safe, Rafelli said: ?Yes.? He added that the board ?unequivocally? stood behind her.

That would be Nancy Brinker, founder and CEO of the foundation, who has spent the last 24 hours chastising critics for criticizing Komen.

So, traditional media, are you still going to keep doing the bidding of the Komen Foundation by pretending it has changed its position? Or are you going to report the truth?

If you want to support an organization that really does care about women's health, click to donate to Planned Parenthood.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Eric Schneiderman files suit against nation's
largest banks for foreclosure fraud

This announcement from New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman indicates that there's still some hope that foreclosure fraud prosecutions could occur.

Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman today filed a lawsuit against several of the nation?s largest banks charging that the creation and use of a private national mortgage electronic registry system known as MERS has resulted in a wide range of deceptive and fraudulent foreclosure filings in New York state and federal courts, harming homeowners and undermining the integrity of the judicial foreclosure process. The lawsuit asserts that employees and agents of Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, acting as "MERS certifying officers," have repeatedly submitted court documents containing false and misleading information that made it appear that the foreclosing party had the authority to bring a case when in fact it may not have. The lawsuit names JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Bank of America, N.A., Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as well as Virginia-based MERSCORP, Inc. and its subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.

A couple of important things: This is an action in Schneiderman's capacity of AG for New York?it is completely separate from his task force work with the new commission created by President Obama. That group is limited to pre-housing bubble conduct, this is targeted at ongoing and current fraud. It's also another potential blow to the settlement negotiations between the states and the feds, and an indication that Schneiderman is no closer to an agreement there than he's ever been. That settlement would release the banks of liability in foreclosure fraud, and Schneiderman clearly doesn't want them off the hook.

But most importantly, it specifically targets MERS as a creation of the banks "to allow financial institutions to evade local county recording fees, avoid the hassle and paperwork of publicly recording mortgage transfers, and facilitate the rapid sale and securitization of mortgages." It goes on, "MERS? indiscriminate use of non-employee ?certifying officers? to execute vital legal documents has confused, misled, and deceived homeowners and the courts and made it difficult to ascertain whether a party actually has the right to foreclose."

The suit seeks injunctive relief as well as damages for the thousands of New York homeowners harmed by MERS. It's as strong a shot across the bow of continuing fraudulent foreclosures by big banks as you could hope for.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Call Buffalo Department of Public Works and
Demand They Return Occupiers Insulin

Call Buffalo Public Works Commissioner Steven J. Stepniak, Mayor Byron Brown and the Buffalo City Council to demand that they immediately return the property of the Occupy Buffalo protesters before their offices close for the weekend. Their high-handed[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/firedoglake/fdl/~3/b3NXw2ceIW8/

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Is Climate Change Likely to Increase Conflict

Likely not, according to Nils Petter Gledditsch, in the introduction to a special issue of the Journal of Peace Research on this topic. Research to date shows little evidence for systematic relationship between increased global warming, water shortages, etc., and violent conflict.

Climate change is the world?s first truly global manmade environmental problem and a firm warning that human activities can influence our physical environment on a global scale. The range of possible consequences of climate change is so wide, even for the limited temperature changes foreseen in the IPCC scenarios, that it is difficult to sort out the main priorities. Obviously, if a reversal of the trend towards a more peaceful world was one of these consequences, it should have a prominent place on the policy agenda. Based on the research reported here, such a pessimistic view may not be warranted in the short to medium run.

In other words?there are a large number of unhappy consequences that may flow from continued global warming. But what evidence we have to date (which is admittedly based either on spotty data, or studies over the shorter term) gives us no very strong reason to argue that an increase in violent conflict is among them.

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

What Happens When You Stand Up: KOMEN CAVES

**UPDATED** “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,” the group said. “We will continue to fund existing grants, including those[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/taylormarshcom/~3/0mKX_iUXemc/

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!

Komen Caves Not Really.

**UPDATED** “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,” the group said. “We will continue to fund existing grants, including those[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/taylormarshcom/~3/HeSe6LOstFo/

Add to del.icio.us

Digg this

Post to Furl

Add to reddit

Add to myYahoo!