Planned Parenthood received, in 2008, $350 million dollars in taxpayer/government funding. The closest numbers I can find for the grants coming in from Susan G Komen are approximately $700K.
Planned Parenthood has an overtly political existence(granted maybe not their fault) and some of its work is highly politically charged in this country. Susan G Komen has an overtly non-political existence and the vast majority of its work has no political bent to it.
The media is the third player here wherein their bias is exposed. I ask sincerely for you, yt, to illustrate how the media firestorm served a corporate media agenda and not a liberal bias agenda.
SGK decides to pull drop-in-the-bucket funding from PP for whatever the reason but let's be unfair and say it was 100% politically motivated.
Two scenarios can unfold from the jump-off point of SGK pulling funds from PP because of the fact that PP provides abortions and not mammograms, only pre-screening services. SGK feels the grant money would better be awarded to actual mammography then pre-screening.
Non-shakedown media driven narrative: PP- "Our services are essential and SGK is making a mistake and jeopardizing the lives of many women that we serve and politics have no place in the health of women."
Wailing and gnashing of teeth ensue, donations flow to both organizations, SGK doesn't reverse its decision. The effectiveness of both organizations continues to be high.
Shakedown media driven narrative: PP- "SGK hates poor women!"
Wailing and gnashing of teeth ensue, donations flow to both organizations, SGK reverses their decision and most likely the most well known breast cancer awareness organization becomes a little less effective at its mission.
A private organization has been browbeaten by PP and a compliant media narrative into continuing drop-in-the-bucket funding for an organization that doesn't even provide the service that the private organization and many, many research studies have shown to be the best practice for fighting breast cancer.
How is that not considered a shakedown? How is that not PP showing its other donors a little muscle and making sure that other donors realize what can happen if PP has to come back and rough them up too?
And what Penn State investigation are you referring to, yt? The Sandusky business? Is Penn State itself under that investigation or is Sandusky the only one being charged? I don't recall seeing anywhere that Penn State was a co-defendant in those allegations but I may be wrong.