Political Animal
Blog
As the Komen Foundation fiasco over its effort to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood continues to unwind, former vice president for policy and Georgia Republican pol Karen Handel continues to create mischief for her former employer. Yes, she quit her job at Komen yesterday, but instead of going on a long vacation from public attention, she’s now setting trashcan fires all over the place.
In an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Jim Galloway, Handel lashed out at Planned Parenthood for a “vicious, vicious” campaign to hang onto its funding, but in doing so acknowledged that Komen’s decision to drop funding in the first place was a highly political reaction to pressure from anti-choice activists.
Handel’s prominent role in the dispute was also underlined by a WaPo report today on how the de-funding decision was actually made. In sharp contradiction to Handel’s claims that the whole deal went down before she was on the scene:
In early April, the board subcommittee held a conference call that included three Komen staff members, including Handel. Handel argued for defunding Planned Parenthood. Staff member Mollie Williams, who oversaw Komen’s community grants, argued to maintain funding. Leslie Aun, a communications official, warned of negative publicity if funding were cut off, according to a former Komen employee,
The consensus of the board subcommittee was to keep the funding, the former employee said.
The board itself decided otherwise.
At this point, Karen Handel has no connection with Komen, having quit her job and turned down a severance package (which would have, under normal circumstances, included a “confidentiality” clause keeping her from granting interviews). Quite possibly she is interested in a return to Georgia Republican politics, where Planned Parenthood is currently considered to be roughly equivalent to the special squads who manned Nazi Germany’s death camps. Her interest in helping Komen treat this saga as having arisen from a technical issue of grant-making is somewhere approaching zero.
It is increasingly clear that Komen’s decision to bring Karen Handel into its decision-making process was an act of monumental folly.
Facebook
Twitter
artsmith on February 08, 2012 3:50 PM:
Ed, thank you for properly referring the Handels of this world as the "anti-choice lobby".
MR Bill on February 08, 2012 3:53 PM:
http://www.southernstudies.org/2012/02/komen-vp-who-opposed-planned-parenthood-a-longtime-foe-of-voting-rights-advocates.html
Yeah, who'd of thought a Movement conservative, who rode antigay, antichoice, and arguably racist positions to power would be a disaster...
stevio on February 08, 2012 3:53 PM:
Monumental folly?
Organizations who hire clowns can't expect the "audience" to expect anything remotely serious to transpire. That existing Board should all summarily resign and make way for a Ringmaster more interested in the future of the circus as a whole.
hells littlest angel on February 08, 2012 4:04 PM:
Handel is a nasty piece of work -- in other words, a potential savior of America. Is it too late for her to get into the Republican presidential primary?
Bob on February 08, 2012 4:10 PM:
Ed, I just have to say I enjoy your breezy writing. "Trashcan fires" has me laughing out loud. So good to have some levity in the midst of all this serious business. Keep it up!
Lifelong Dem on February 08, 2012 4:17 PM:
Good. I hope Karen Handel gets a lot of TV bookings--maybe she can compete with John McCain for Sunday talk show appearances--to keep this whole controversy in front of the public. That's exactly what Komen does for hiring her in the first place.
Cal Gal on February 08, 2012 4:18 PM:
Except right-wing anti-health policies are not that uncommon at Komen. They oppose stem-cell research, and obviously the Board in general is anti-choice or they would not have made this decision.
They knew what they were getting when they hired her.
It was their own blindness to what women NATIONALLY think about issues of choice and women's health.
The anti-choice lobby is much, much louder than the pro-choice lobby, and they were just stupid in not realizing how pro-choice would not only view THIS stupid decision but also their other anti-health actions once this imbroglio revealed them.
T2 on February 08, 2012 4:20 PM:
when you hire a Right Wing Tool to create your "Policy"....don't be surprised when you end up with a Right Wing policy. Komen had to know what they were getting, and I think that's the part that has women pissed.
Th on February 08, 2012 4:32 PM:
This was a great career move by Handel. She will get paid lots of money to portray the professional victim on right-wing media. Write that book fast, Karen.
howard on February 08, 2012 4:36 PM:
steveio hit the nail on the head at 3:53 - what stands revealed from this fiasco is that komen has an unreliable board, and there's no point in taking it seriously until the board changes.
indeed, when i recently got a move-on pitch about demanding that komen keep funding planned parenthood, my response was: no way. i don't want their money. i already give money to planned parenthood but i'll give more (and so, i'm sure, will others). komen money is tainted and shouldn't even be requested, much less "demanded."
Rick Massimo on February 08, 2012 4:48 PM:
"In an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Jim Galloway, Handel lashed out at Planned Parenthood for a “vicious, vicious” campaign to hang onto its funding, but in doing so acknowledged that Komen’s decision to drop funding in the first place was a highly political reaction to pressure from anti-choice activists."
You say that as though there's some connection between a vicious, vicious campaign by filthy advocates for women's health and righteous political pressure from anti-choicers, which is as American as sniffing panties.
Sgt. Gym Bunny on February 08, 2012 4:49 PM:
Ok. Just read the interview.
In yesterday's Handel's resignation, she alluded to some obscure "controversies" with PP that were the basis of the whole funding kerfluffle last week. So those big bad controversies were the "Catholic dioceses around the country telling parishioners, don’t support Komen, leaving race teams, donor questions, et cetera." And this, she says, warranted her to support the "move to neutral ground" (yes, her words) by pulling funding from PP. As I said yesterday, if it were such a big "controversy" why haven't we heard about it until now--coming from Handel, of course.
Let's put this in perspective. Has anyone taken a look at who SGK's Corporate Sponsors are? And a Catholic dozen diocese were threatening the mother of all "backlashes" that threatened SGK's future funding and what not? If she seriously thinks--even with 20/20 hindsight--that all of this was worth it, she has some serious cost-benefit analysis issues to resolve.
barkleyg on February 08, 2012 4:54 PM:
YES, the decision was POLITICAL!
On a side note, the Komen Public Relations fiasco makes it look like Tiger Woods was putting for par, until his PR fiasco, in which case Tiger will be putting for a double bogey on Sunday! BONG!!
What was the final "straw" for Tiger's ex wife? When she found out that he had "hit the back NINE"!
schtick on February 08, 2012 4:54 PM:
I expect her to be hired at ClusterFaux Fake and BS Nuwz real soon and then use that format to run for office. All the negative things about Komen that were well hidden (I love the one where they sent a donation request to a women with breast cancer and kept sending requests to her.), have now been brought out into the open.
I said it before and I'll be a nag and say it again, donate to the organizations that you know they are going actually use the money for what they say they are. With this world of instant information, it's easy enough to find out.
crapcha....complete umZealt....complete?
kevo on February 08, 2012 4:54 PM:
Perhaps her temperment is not right for women health issues and services. Handel seems to have an incendiary personality. If so, she also is in possession of another toxic trait, fundamentalism!
The combination of incendiary personality and fundamentalism prodives for the same intersection we usually find suicide bombers!
Handel is no good for children and other living creatures who merely wish to have a secure sense of privacy between themselves and their doctors! She should go away now! -Kevo
DRF on February 08, 2012 5:00 PM:
Thus far, Handel's responses have actually been consistent with Komen's position and she hasn't yet flipped on Komen.
No one believed Komen's original public position that this was just a routine change of funding criteria. The organization quickly moved to its Plan B position--that in deciding to defund PP, they weren't acting politically, but were simply seeking to avoid a controversy.
Of course, that is equally nonsensical, but Handel is taking that same position. The "vicious, vicious" campaign comment just seems ridiculous. I would love for someone to push Handel to back that up with some facts.
gus on February 08, 2012 5:04 PM:
I don’t think conservatives and the GOP are going to have an easy year when it comes down to Unity.
Use any metaphor you wish about their big tent or their house of cards or whatever, whatever Unity they believe they have is not going to last. This issue and other related women’s health issues alone are causing fissures. So be it.
And, as some others pointed out earlier, Ed’s piece is well considered and well written. That’s some mighty fine blog posting.
Kathryn on February 08, 2012 5:22 PM:
Three points, 1. Koman 's decision to cut off mammograms for women who lack the resources to otherwise obtain screening is what sparked outrage in me and many others, I suspect.
2. Planned Parenthood under the leadership of Cecile Richards was classy, classy not vicious, vicious as Ms. Handel claims.
3. Karen Handel will be the rights latest victim of the MSM and evil liberals. Handel is drinking champagne tonight, fame and fortune are beckoning.
DONATE TO PLANNED PARENTHOOD!
N. Bates on February 08, 2012 5:48 PM:
If I may make a point about the precipitating issue itself: Remember that this wasn't about someone voluntarily starting an "insurance business" but an employer with no particular a priori interest or connection to what insurance does, being made to cover this and that. Given even a muddled and debatable situation, why not just bypass such problems by pulling health insurance away from employment and employers? If it should be a basic right, then treat it like one. Make it work individually like voting, make it like enrollment in Medicare or Medicaid. Would you like to register to vote through your employer?
TCinLA on February 08, 2012 6:41 PM:
It is increasingly clear that Komen’s decision to bring Karen Handel into its decision-making process was an act of monumental folly.
Wghat do you expect from a bunch of far right Dallas Republican socialites (which is what the board of Komen is)???
square1 on February 08, 2012 7:02 PM:
I'm quite disappointed in Kilgore's willingess to let this pass as some act of "folly."
Clearly Komen's board has been infected by political zealots. How else to characterize board members who are willing to undermine Komen's ostensible core mission of preventing breast cancer by literally defunding cancer screening in the service of anti-abortion activism?
What it makes it all the more disgusting is that it was both calculated and devious: That Handel would blatantly lie and claim that PP funding was being withheld because PP was "under investigation" makes it quite clear that she knew that her anti-PP agenda was both indefensible and unpopular.
I for one am glad that Handel over-reached. Had she played her cards better she could possibly have slowly turned the spigot off to PP without getting caught out as a wingnut zealot.
Sadly, Komen is not the only organization that has been co-opted. E.g. AARP has been infected by corporate moles who have made sure that the organization doesn't advocate for any positions that might cost the health care industry too much. In fact, AARP hired Frank Luntz as a consultant and focus group tester during the health care reform saga. Oddly enough, AARP advocated a "balanced" solution to health care reform even though Republicans have systematically opposed policies like drug importation or bulk government purchases of drugs that would save AARP members millions or billions of dollars.
Doug on February 08, 2012 7:22 PM:
"It is increasingly clear that Komen's decision to bring Karen Handel into its decision-making process was an act of monumental FOLLY*." Ed Kilgore
"I'm quite disappointed Kilgore's willingness to let this pass as some act of 'FOLLY*'...Had she played her cards better she could possibly have slowly turned the spigot off to PP without getting caught out as a wing-nut zealot." square1 @ 7:02 PM.
I don't think that word means what you think it does...
* my emphasis
Danny on February 08, 2012 7:54 PM:
There's quick way for Komen to get back where they were a week ago, if ever. But as long as Brinker is CEO their brand will remain cat piss. That woman lied to donors, organizers, straight to their face. How could they ever trust her with their money again?
Coop on February 08, 2012 8:02 PM:
Will Handel file for unemployment compensation since nasty liberals obviously drove her from her job?
exlibra on February 08, 2012 11:30 PM:
Clearly Komen's board has been infected by political zealots. -- square1, @7:02 PM
Not "infected", which suggests it had started off healthy. But Komen had been started by Brinker -- an out-and-out Repub zealot and ideologue, who never even tried Haydn it. It's just that, until last week, nobody was paying much attention to the Komen's "small print".
Lolly on February 09, 2012 1:09 PM:
Square1--dead-on about AARP. They provided cover for Bush and his gift-wrapped legislation for the Pharma companies a few years back.
Believe it or not, they have also adopted the "Social Security is a ponzi scheme" rhetoric of Pete Peterson and company. Their magazine's editorial stance uses every opportunity to cluck cluck about what a foolish mess Social Security is, and tells its readers that Americans need to be willing to accept a higher retirement age and benefit cutbacks.