Big Sister Is Watching You

Totalitarian feminism and the smearing of Susan G. Komen.

By JAMES TARANTO

The smear campaign against the breast cancer charity Susan G. Komen for the Cure appears to have had its desired effect, although this may turn out to be a case in which appearances are deceiving. LifeNews.com, an antiabortion site, quotes the statement by Komen founder Nancy Brinker:

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.

But Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, parses the statement for LifeNews and finds it actually reflects no change in policy: "We have known and have reported that they are continuing five grants [to Planned Parenthood] through 2012. This is a reference to that. The second clause about eligibility is certainly true. Any group can apply for anything. It does not mean they are going to get anything."
Of course, it also doesn't mean they're not going to get anything. The Daily Caller reports that Komen's donations doubled in the two days after the Planned Parenthood assault began, presumably because lots of people wanted to support its apolitical work against breast cancer but did not want to give money to a group that was subsidizing a group that both performs and advocates for abortion.
If that describes you, you might consider following the advice of our friend Susan Carusi: Give to a local breast cancer support group, "which provides counseling and assistance to women diagnosed with breast cancer. At least this way you know exactly what the money is being spent on."
While our sympathies are with Komen in this whole kerfuffle, we must say that the group has displayed an appalling naiveté in its approach to the matter. It's reminiscent of the last big controversy the group was involved in, which we wrote about in 2009. In that instance, Komen hosted a conference in Alexandria, Egypt, for "international advocates." Komen was sandbagged when Israeli doctors who'd been invited to the event received disinvitations from the Egyptian health minister. The Egyptians backpedaled, but by then it was too late for the Israelis to attend.
In breaking ties with Planned Parenthood, Komen made the same mistake: It failed to understand it was dealing with intolerant fanatics. Planned Parenthood's attitude toward abortion opponents is not unlike that of Egyptian officials in the old regime toward Israelis.
Further, Komen offered a rationale for its decision--a new policy denying grants to groups under governmental investigation--that seemed disingenuous and provided a point of attack for Planned Parenthood and its allies. "I'm reminded of the McCarthy era, where somebody said: 'Oh,' a congressman stands up, a senator, 'I'm investigating this organization and therefore people should stop funding them,' " Politico quotes Sen. Barbara Boxer as saying on MSNBC.

Associated Press

George Orwell

In truth, Komen was under no obligation to fund Planned Parenthood. Its decision not to do so was not punitive and did not even appear to be. The episode is reminiscent of George Orwell far more than Joe McCarthy. Komen's actual aim was to extricate itself from the divisive national battle over abortion by severing its connection with a leading combatant.
The conservative Media Research Center notes that CNN "aired a pretty one-sided piece including statements from Planned Parenthood's president Cecile Richards, evidence supporting her claims of right-wing 'bullying,' and even vitriolic Facebook posts decrying the de-funding." No supporter of Komen's position or critic of Planned Parenthood was included. Even more appalling than that lack of balance, though, was CNN's echoing the charge of "right-wing 'bullying,' " while the network was participating in Planned Parenthood's effort to bully Komen.
The Ministry of Information--sorry, the New York Times--editorializes:

With its roster of corporate sponsors and the pink ribbons that lend a halo to almost any kind of product you can think of, the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation has a longstanding reputation as a staunch protector of women's health. That reputation suffered a grievous, perhaps mortal, wound this week from the news that Komen, the world's largest breast cancer organization, decided to betray that mission. It threw itself into the middle of one of America's nastiest political battles, on the side of hard-right forces working to demonize Planned Parenthood and undermine women's health and freedom.

The truth is that Komen blundered into a political battle by supporting Planned Parenthood in the first place and was attempting to back out of it quietly.
The Times's view exemplifies feminism's gradual transformation into a totalitarian ideology. Totalitarianism politicizes everything, so that neutrality is betrayal--in this case, neutrality on abortion is portrayed as opposition to "women's health." As we wrote last year, this is also why purportedly pro-choice feminists can hate Sarah Palin and her daughter for choosing not to abort their children.
Komen would have been better off approaching the matter straightforwardly, by announcing that it wished to opt out of the abortion debate and would not support groups that take a position on either side of the issue, including Planned Parenthood. This would not have averted the smear campaign that followed, for Planned Parenthood and its supporters have internalized the notion that abortion is health, and are determined that everyone else internalize it too. But an honest position would have been easier to defend. No one would have been able to dent Komen's integrity.
Endangered Donks?
Is the Republican Party on the rise? A pair of surveys released yesterday, from Gallup and Pew, suggest so.
Gallup's poll is a state-by-state breakdown:

Democrats have lost their solid political party affiliation advantage in 18 states since 2008, while Republicans have gained a solid advantage in 6 states. A total of 17 states were either solidly Republican or leaning Republican in their residents' party affiliation in 2011, up from 10 in 2010 and 5 in 2008. Meanwhile, 19 states including the District of Columbia showed a solid or leaning Democratic orientation, down from 23 in 2010 and 36 in 2008. The remaining 15 states were relatively balanced politically, with neither party having a clear advantage.

In 2008, a whopping 29 states were "solid Democratic," one state more than Barack Obama carried. (Gallup's chart says 30, but that includes D.C.) Only five of the 50 states were on the Republican side four years ago, four "solid" and one "lean."
Pew, which breaks down its results by religious affiliation, finds a similar GOP upsurge:

The share of voters identifying with or leaning toward the GOP has either grown or held steady in every major religious group. . . .

Among white evangelical Protestants (a traditionally Republican group), support for the GOP has grown from 65% in 2008 to 70% today. The GOP has also posted gains among Mormons, with 80% now saying they identify with or lean toward the Republican Party. Republican gains are also apparent among white mainline Protestants (who were evenly divided between the parties in 2008 but who now favor the GOP by a 12-point margin) and white non-Hispanic Catholics (among whom an eight-point Democratic advantage in 2008 has become a seven-point Republican advantage at the end of 2011).

Even Jewish voters, who have traditionally been and remain one of the strongest Democratic constituencies, have moved noticeably in the Republican direction; Jewish voters favored the Democrats by a 52-point margin in 2008 but now prefer the Democratic Party by a significantly smaller 36-point margin.

There has been less change in the partisanship of black Protestants and the religiously unaffiliated, two other strongly Democratic groups.

There may be specific explanations for some of these findings. Most obviously, it's hardly surprising that Mormons are moving toward the GOP when Mitt Romney is the party's leading presidential candidate.
More broadly, what seems clear from the Republicans' 2008-12 improvement is that the party's decline in 2006-08 was temporary--although it is an imponderable to what extent the resurgence is a reaction to the failed leadership of Barack Obama's Democrats as opposed to the anti-GOP sentiment of 2008 having simply worn off. It would be interesting to compare this year's numbers with those from 2004, the last time the Republicans were riding high in a presidential year.
Trump Roast
"On his campaign Twitter account Thursday afternoon, President Obama tweeted out a video of real estate magnate/reality TV star Donald Trump endorsing Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney," ABC News reports:

"@BarackObama: In case you missed it: http://OFA.BO/FTvUmj," the tweet reads, with a link to Associated Press video from the endorsement announcement.

"We wanted to ensure that no one missed what the Romney campaign believes is a critical moment in the campaign for them," a top Obama campaign official tells ABC News.

The network notes that the tweet didn't end "-BO," which means, according to Obama's Twitter bio, that it was written by a staffer and not the president himself. But this leads to a question: Does the Obama campaign think Trump's endorsement will cost Romney votes?
If so, we are skeptical. Elites on both the left and right--very much including this columnist--disdain Trump, but we find it hard to believe swing voters give a damn. The Obama campaign looks to us as if it's just making a play for the cool kids here.
The Sincerest Form of Flattery

• "Remember 'Compassionate Conservatism'? 'I'm not concerned about the very poor,' says this year's GOP front-runner."--headline and subheadline, Best of the Web Today, Feb. 1
• "Remember 'compassionate conservatism'? Mr. Romney has, however, done away with that pretense."--former Enron adviser Paul Krugman, New York Times, Feb. 3

Metaphor Alert
"When will we reign [sic] in our country's spooked team of political horses pulling a buggy full of culture trash? What scored them off their well-worn moral path? The drivers are of the new public opinion, brain-wash breed, that have whipped our equines into a frantic frenzy, just chasing after entertainment, fun, excitement and government entitlements. Where are those from our distant past who had trained them to travel the hard-working virtuous road? The ones who followed the narrow way of faithfulness and honor? The sustenance they carried was nourishment for our souls in God's own book."--Doris Kyllo, letter to the editor, Daily Record (Ellensburg, Wash.), Feb. 2
Other Than That, the Story Was Accurate

• "Editor's Note: A commentary by Leo Webb, 'Returning veteran has few marketable skills,' prompted questions from listeners about Webb's account of his service as an Army sniper in Iraq. A subsequent investigation found that the Army has no record of Webb. Webb also said he pitched for a Chicago Cubs minor-league team. Inquiries to the Cubs and to Minor League Baseball found no record of Webb. Marketplace has an obligation to provide accurate information. That was not met in this commentary. It has been retracted and the text and audio have been removed from the web site."--Marketplace.org, Feb. 1
• "Update 2:39 p.m. Scratch all of that. The Atlantic Wire has learned that ww5.komen.org, has always been the organization's website(and it still is today)--this also sort of debunks Gather's previous theory (below), meaning that the "hack" could have possibly been an alteration of one of the site's banners not the entire website."--TheAtlanticWire.com, Feb. 2

Out on a Limb

• "Ben Bernanke: Spending 'Unsustainable' "--headline, Politico.com, Feb. 2
• "The Importance of U.S. Military Might Shouldn't Be Underestimated"--headline, Washington Post, Feb. 3

The Rich Really Are Just Like the Rest of Us
"Some Wealthy Donors Drop Obama for Romney"--headline, RollCall.com, Feb. 2
That's What She Said
"Obama at Prayer Breakfast: 'I Have Fallen on My Knees With Great Regularity' "--headline, Investors Business Daily website, Feb. 2
'If You Take Half the People at an Ohio State Football Game on Saturday Afternoon and They Were to Have Voted the Other Way, You and I Would Be Having a Discussion Today About My State of the Union Speech'
"Kate Middleton, 'Hat Person of the Year'? Time for a Recount!"--headline, Los Angeles Times website, Feb. 1
It Shouldn't Make a Difference, Given the Law of Conservation of Mass
"Does Donald Trump Support Matter?"--headline, FoxNews.com, Feb. 2
Himmler Had Something Similar
"Q & A: How a Fancy Austrian Ball Stirred Worry About Neo-Nazis"--headline, Los Angeles Times website, Feb. 1