Connect with us

Komen: The Extreme Anti-Gay Views Of Their VP Who Dumped Planned Parenthood

Published

on

When Nancy Brinker, the founder and CEO of Susan G. Komen For The Cure hired Karen Handel as her Senior Vice President, she knew what she was getting. Handel, who joined Komen in April of 2011, had not only previously worked for Komen, but had been Georgia’s Secretary of State and had run for Governor of the Peach Tree State as well. As it turns out, Handel’s move to the Dallas, Texas based breast cancer non-profit was not a huge transition for her personal politics: she is 100% anti-gay. In a 21st century United States of America, where the majority support same-sex marriage, and the majority support a women’s right to choose, it’s unconscionable that the Susan G. Komen Foundation would hire someone so rabidly against the gay community and women. But Nancy Brinker — whose last-ditch effort to lie her way out of a public relations nightmare yesterday in an interview with breast-cancer survivor and MSNBC anchor and veteran journalist Andrea Mitchell proved disastrous — did just that: hire as senior VP a woman opposed to women’s rights and gay rights. If that was in fact her goal, she accomplished it in expert fashion. Let’s be perfectly clear here: Komen does not fund abortions at Planned Parenthood. Their Planned Parenthood funding was used for women’s health and especially for mammograms, a direct tie-in with the Komen mission to reduce and cure breast cancer. So, their defunding of Planned Parenthood was merely a malicious and political move. Period. And it’s important to see through today’ well-planned PR smokescreen:

READ: Why You Still Shouldn’t Trust Susan G. Komen, Even After Their Reversal

Below is a 2010 interview with former Georgia politician and Komen VP Karen Handel, which focuses on then-candidate Handel’s positions on gay rights, gay adoption, and gay marriage, just one year prior to her joining Komen in 2011. Almost amusingly, Handel in the beginning of the video attempts to minimalize her association with the Georgia chapter of the L0g Cabin Republicans, the gay Republican group of which she was a dues-paying member, and which actually endorsed her two years running. And throughout, but especially at the end of the interview, Handel flat out acknowledges her ignorance and bigotry. Local Georgia reporter Doug Richards asks, “I guess I want to know why you don’t think gay parents are as legitimate and heterosexual parents?” Handel’s uppity response: “Because I don’t.” Here’s the complete transcript, and the video from reporter Richards:

Handel:  (The Log Cabin Republican check is) certainly not a membership.  And I don’t think going to an event constitutes membership, nor does it constitute agreeing with everything they have to say either. Richards:  Why did you do that? A:  Well, when you’re out campaigning — remember, I was campaigning for Fulton County Commission — so I think it was important for me to speak to all the various Republican groups.  Let’s remember a lot of Republicans have spoken to the Log Cabin organization, from, I think (Senator Johnny) Isakson has spoken, Sonny Perdue has spoken.  It was part of going out and trying to run a comprehensive campaign.  And the key, I think, was to make sure that I was doing the outreach with folks.  And it was better to not have folks be adversarial against me, and so that was the whole point of it. Q:  You said there were issues where you may have agreed and disagreed on.  What were the issues you agreed with them on? A:  From taxes and cutting the spending at Fulton County and candidly, the organization was a good ally on those types of fiscal issues. Q:  You have said that you are — you’re against gay marriage, right? A:  Mm hm.  Absolutely.  Marriage is between one man and one woman.  And I’ve been very very clear about that.  And the record is clear about any of the other issues like domestic partner benefits or anything like that.  In fact in Fulton, I voted no on domestic partner benefits. Q:  Are you against civil unions for gays? A:  Yes.  I think that’s not an issue that has come forward in Georgia.  We have the constitutional amendment against gay marriage, and I don’t want to see any taxpayer funding going toward benefits etcetera for a couple that is not married.  In our state and for me, marriage is for one man and one woman. Q:  Why is that? A:  Why is marriage between one man and one woman?  (Laughs).  Are you serious? Q:  Yes.  Well why — do you view committed gay relationships as being less legitimate than committed heterosexual relationships? A:  As a Christian, I view relationships and marriage as being between a man and a woman. Q:  But what about the legitimacy of the relationship?  Do you have any gay friends?  Do you know gay couples? A:  Of course I do.  Are we going to spend our whole day talking on this issue? Q:  I want to know how you feel about this. A:  I’ve been very clear.  And you know, as a Christian, marriage is between a man and a woman.  I do not think that gay relationships are — they are not what God intended.  And that’s just my viewpoint on it.  Others might disagree with that.  But I would also hope that if you look at what is happening in our state, we’ve got issues we need to be focused on in Georgia.  We have a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.  And it’s something that I supported wholeheartedly.  We have that, and let’s get dealing with the other issues that we also need to deal with in Georgia.  And the press can help with that.  (Laughs). Q:  Frequently, folks in the legislature kind of threaten to — there are always rumblings in the legislature that they may outlaw gay adoptions.  You’re against gay adoption. A:  I am against gay adoption.  But remember — I mean, if there is legislation on  that, certainly I will follow that and look at it.  But in the end, ultimately courts are going to be the ones to have to make the decision on that and it’s always in the best interests of the child.  Do I think that gay parents is in the best interest of the child?  No.  But we do have our court system that deals with many and most of those issues. Q:  Would you favor outlawing gay adoptions? A:  Yeah, I would consider that, absolutely. Q:  Do you know any gay couples with children? A:  Not that I’m aware of. Q:  So you think gay couples are less qualified to function as parents than straight couples? A:  I think that for a child to be in a household — in a family in a household with a situation where the parents are not married, as in one man and one woman, is not the best household for a child. Q:  Is it better or worse than a single parent household? A:  Doug, I’m really trying to be straightforward with you but I’m not going to debate all the nuances.  I’ve made it abundantly clear that I think that marriage is between a man and a woman.  And that’s what I believe, and I don’t know what more you would like me to add to that. Q:  I guess I want to know why you think gay parents aren’t as legitimate as heterosexual parents. A:  Because I don’t. Q:  (Pause)  Well, I realize that. A:  Well, Doug, we’re not going to spend the whole day discussing this issue.  And you know, it ‘s really kind of disappointing — we invited you on this (leg of the bus trip). Q:  I know. A:  So we’re going to need to move on. Hat-tip: Aaron Furtado Baldwin and Wendy Equal Leigh

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘She Kills People’: Trump Amps Up Attack on Cheney After Violent ‘Nine Barrels’ Rhetoric

Published

on

Donald Trump has extended his attack against one of his top political critics, Liz Cheney, falsely alleging late Friday afternoon the Republican former U.S. congresswoman “kills people.”

“She kills people. She wanted to, even in my administration she was pushing that we go to war with everybody and I said, ‘If you ever gave her a rifle and let her do the fighting, if you ever do that, she wouldn’t be doing too well,’ I will tell [you] right now,” Trump said during a campaign stop in Michigan, Politico reported (video below). “She’s a war hawk.”

The ex-president, whose rhetoric, critics say, is growing increasingly violent as Election Day approaches, also charged Cheney “wants to go kill people unnecessarily” and called her “a disgrace.”

There are no reports that Cheney, who also served as vice chair on the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, and has crossed the aisle to endorse and campaign for Vice President Kamala Harris, has ever killed anyone.

RELATED: ‘How Dictators Destroy Free Nations’: Trump Slammed for Suggesting Firing Squad for Cheney

“Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrel shooting at her, okay? Let’s see how she feels about it,” Trump had said Thursday, speaking on a stage with far-right podcaster Tucker Carlson.

Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump’s Democratic presidential opponent, denounced the ex-president’s remarks Friday afternoon.

“This must be disqualifying,” she told reporters, CBS News reports. “Anyone who wants to be president of the United States who uses that kind of violent rhetoric is clearly disqualified and unqualified to be president.”

In addition to Harris’s remarks, Trump has been widely condemned on the left for his violent remarks, which some claimed were a call for Cheney’s execution. The state attorney general in Arizona has opened an investigation into the ex-president’s comments to determine if it was a death threat, according to CNN.

“Trump’s use of violent language dates back to his first presidential campaign, in 2015 and 2016, when he suggested a heckler deserved to be “roughed up” and said he’d like to punch another in the face,” CNN also reported. “Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper wrote in his memoir that while in office, Trump raised the idea of shooting protesters who took to the streets around the White House after the killing of George Floyd in 2020.

READ MORE: ‘Don’t Fall for This’: Vance’s ‘Normal Gay Guy Vote’ Claim Mocked, Criticized as ‘Gross’

“’Can’t you just shoot them? Just shoot them in the legs or something?’ Trump asked, according to Esper.”

Earlier on Friday after massive condemnation Trump appeared to try to clarify his comments, a rare response when under fire.

Despite telling supporters in Michigan that Cheney “kills people,” on his Truth Social website he wrote: “All I’m saying about Liz Cheney is that she is a War Hawk, and a dumb one at that, but she wouldn’t have ‘the guts’ to fight herself.”

Watch Trump’s remarks from Michigan below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Embarrassing’: JD Vance’s Story About How He Responded to Trump Shooting Sparks Concerns

Continue Reading

News

‘Showing Up’ and ‘Coming Together’: Harris Talks ‘Enthusiasm,’ Campaign Highlights ‘Momentum’

Published

on

Vice President Kamala Harris is expressing cautious optimism in the final days of the 2024 presidential race, saying voters are “showing up,” and she is “seeing an incredible amount of enthusiasm from people of every walk of life.”

“What I’m enjoying the most about this moment is that in spite of how my opponent spends full time trying to divide the American people, what I’m seeing is people coming together under one roof who seemingly have nothing in common, and know they have everything in common,” the Democratic presidential nominee told reporters Friday afternoon (video below). “And I think that is in the best interest of the strength of our nation.”

Vice President Harris and her campaign have been focused, deliberate, and on-message since she began running for president just 103 days ago. Earlier this week, campaign manager and co-chair Jen O’Malley Dillion sought to tamp-down fears and anxiety from Harris’ supporters in a three-minute video acknowledging that the “race is going to be extremely close,” and “we still have a lot of work to do,” while saying, “we’re on track to win a very close election,” and “we feel really good with what we’re seeing.”

READ MORE: ‘Don’t Fall for This’: Vance’s ‘Normal Gay Guy Vote’ Claim Mocked, Criticized as ‘Gross’

Early Friday afternoon the campaign became a bit less tight-lipped, appearing to “leak” to reporters a somewhat more optimistic view of the election.

“Senior Harris campaign staff say their internal data shows Harris winning battleground state voters who have made up their minds in the last week by double-digit margins. They say that Trump’s MSG [Madison Square Garden] rally was the ‘last straw’ for late-breaking undecided voters,” TIME’s Charlotte Alter reported.

“Top Harris brass says their organizing operation has knocked on 13 million doors across the battleground states. In October, they made 100m [100 million] calls into battleground states,” Alter wrote. “In PA alone, their team is on track to knock 5m doors and have 1m conversations with voters by election day.”

“Top campaign staff believe Harris’s momentum is [because] of the work they’re putting in, but also [because] Trump’s MSG fiasco has broken through to late-breaking undecided voters. The MSG rally has sharpened the contrast and reminded voters what Trump is like.”

Meanwhile, Harris campaign senior advisor David Plouffe, who ran Barack Obama’s successful 2008 presidential campaign and became his White House senior advisor, offered additional insight.

“It’s helpful, from experience, to be closing a Presidential campaign with late deciding voters breaking by double digits to you and the remaining undecideds looking more friendly to you than your opponent. Close race, turnout and 4 days of hard work will be key. But good mo,” he wrote, appearing to mean “momentum.”

Former journalist and retired pundit Craig Crawford responded with data from Gallup:

“Voter enthusiasm is high, with Democrats more enthusiastic than Republicans,” Gallup reported Thursday. “Democrats maintain elevated election enthusiasm, at 77%, compared with 67% among Republicans.”

“Momentum” appears to be the key word for the Harris campaign and supporters as Election Day fast approaches.

READ MORE: ‘How Dictators Destroy Free Nations’: Trump Slammed for Suggesting Firing Squad for Cheney

Harris campaign surrogate, Illinois Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker, talked about “momentum” on CNN Thursday night:

Neera Tanden, Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council noted on Thursday, “Lots of interesting endorsements today. You can feel the momentum.”

On Wednesday Harris spokesperson Ian Sams also talked about “momentum.”

Watch the video of Harris below, additional videos above, or all at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Embarrassing’: JD Vance’s Story About How He Responded to Trump Shooting Sparks Concerns

 

Continue Reading

COMMENTARY

‘Don’t Fall for This’: Vance’s ‘Normal Gay Guy Vote’ Claim Mocked, Criticized as ‘Gross’

Published

on

Republican vice-presidential nominee JD Vance’s claim that he and his running mate, Donald Trump, will likely win the votes of the “normal gay guy” is being mocked, with some pointing to his stated opposition to same-sex marriage protection legislation. But in full context, it’s being called out as divisive against the LGBTQ+ community, and “gross.”

“And I think that frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if me and Trump won just the normal gay guy vote, because, again, they just wanted to be left the hell alone, and now you have all this crazy stuff on top of it,” Vance says in a short clip from his interview Thursday with podcaster Joe Rogan.

Democratic strategist Matt McDermott weighed in, writing, “Not sure what a ‘normal’ gay guy is, but speaking as a fairly typical gay guy I can confirm that myself, my husband, and literally every gay guy I know will proudly be voting for Kamala Harris and rejecting your grotesque bigotry.”

READ MORE: ‘How Dictators Destroy Free Nations’: Trump Slammed for Suggesting Firing Squad for Cheney

Author and activist Chasten Buttigieg, who is married to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, appeared to mock Vance’s remarks:

“Sorry wasn’t on here to see JD Vance’s latest gaffe. My husband and I were taking our kids trick-or-treating. In our minivan. With costumes from Target. Anyway, have you made a plan to knock doors for Kamala Harris this weekend?”

CNN’s Anderson Cooper led a panel Thursday night and mocked Vance’s remarks, saying, “I guess gay people are now accepted,” and called it “sort of progress.”

Mark McDevitt, Chief of Staff to U.S. Rep. Lori Trahan (D-MA) wrote: “It’s rich to hear JD Vance try to talk about ‘normal gay guys’ as if he hasn’t spent years pushing the idea that being gay alone is abnormal and immoral. Now he wants to move the goal post to create divisions within our community. It’s gross.”

“A good reminder that solidarity is so important,” McDevitt added. “They will not spare the so called ‘normal gay guys’ when they come to dismantle the rights of the LGBTQ community. Don’t fall for this crap.”

READ MORE: ‘Embarrassing’: JD Vance’s Story About How He Responded to Trump Shooting Sparks Concerns

Author Lucas Schaefer noted, “What Vance is actually saying by ‘normal gay guy,’ from what I can tell, is ‘not trans’ but as anyone with a sense of history knows, after they destroy trans lives they’re coming for the rest of us. The acronym is fitting; we rise or fall together.”

Indeed, in context, according to a transcript, Vance’s remarks are exceptionally divisive and destructive.

He goes from talking about “the Nashville shooter,” who “went in and murdered a bunch of children at a Christian school because he or she, like whatever, was motivated by some very radical trans ideology. And that is something we should talk more about as a country,” to “these signs that are in super woke neighborhoods, I’m sure there’s plenty of them in Austin, like, ‘in this house, we believe science is real,'” to someone who is a “pro-gay rights guy,” who “sort of made the observation that when you get into the really radical trans stuff, you actually start to notice the similarities between a practiced religious faith and what these guys are doing.”

As the conversation continues, Vance says, “I’ll never forget,” a gay friend of his, “sent me something like six or so years ago. And it was Elizabeth Warren when she was running for president and she was like, ‘we stand for all non-binary two-spirit’ and all of the like, the LGBTI plus. She was talking about all the plus and she was codifying it. And he sent me this text message with this Elizabeth Warren tweet. And he’s like, I don’t know what the hell two-spirit is. We just wanted to be left the hell alone. And I think that, frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if me and Trump won just the normal gay guy vote, because again, they just wanted to be left the hell alone, and now you have all this crazy stuff on top of it that they’re like, we didn’t wanna give pharmaceutical products to nine-year-olds who are transitioning their genders.”

The Harris campaign took a swipe at Vance by posting the Rogan clip and Vance’s remarks at a debate where he says he’s “come out against” a marriage equality bill.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Nauseous’: Trump’s Refusal to Grasp ‘Consent’ Revives ‘Access Hollywood’ Scandal

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.