NOW Sues Over Fatherhood Programs

... it seems like it brings benefits exclusively to men (fathers). It's perfectly legal though if it brings benefits only to women (mothers). Or just women. They don't even need to be mothers.

No 2x-standards there. Nope, none at all.

Nope, no double standards here at all.

There are hypocrites and then there is NOW, the mother of all hypocrites. Whenever tactics like this are used I think we need to give them some of the same medicine.

For example, when will we be seeing half of all VAWA funds allocated for domestic violence victim shelters being used to establish men's shelters? I think we need a class action suit over that one for starters.

Someone should look into this. NOW feels that programs and services to help Fathers are discriminatory (see below).

There's something rotten in Amerika. NOW's historical efforts to achieve equality of services (through HHS grants) appears to smack of gross hypocrisy, to say the very least. Where is proof of non-discrimination in services from all the money NOW has historically received from HHS?

Tammy Bruce writes in her book The New Thought Police, Pp's. 136, 137, 138, about money accepted by NOW, under suspicious circumstances, from the Clinton Administration (see below for excerpt). Tammy Bruce is the former President of Los Angeles NOW.

And now NOW is endorsing Hillary Clinton for President (link to documentation is at bottom). How's that for "standing by your man," and your man's woman?

============================================================
NOW Demands Access to Program Geared to Fathers
http://www.washingt onpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/ article/2007/ 03/28/AR20070328 02065_pf. html

By Christopher Lee
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 29, 2007; 11:30 AM

"It's called the Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Initiative, and the Bush administration doles out up to $50 million annually to fund its programs to build job skills and help fathers connect better with their children. But the National Organization for Women says the effort is illegal because it's only about men.

NOW and Legal Momentum, another advocacy group, filed complaints yesterday with the Department of Health and Human Services alleging sex discrimination in the initiative that is funding about 100 programs this year."
============================================================
except from The New Thought Police by Tammy Bruce, Pp's. 136, 137, 138:

"...one courageous former NOW board member revealed what she felt was a serious conflict of interest.

I learned that in 1995, during Clinton's first term, NOW accepted Federal money for the first time in its history. According to my source, California NOW was close to bankruptcy at the time. Meanwhile, Paula Jones's sexual harassment case had begun to pick up steam as she fought for her right to sue Clinton while he was in office. The President himself was gearing up for his reelection campaign the following year. Instead of taking on Clinton as we had taken on Clarence Thomas, NOW may have opted instead to take on some money.

According to the Grants Management Office of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, California NOW was awarded more than half a million dollars in grant from --- get this --- the Centers for Disease Control's Office on Smoking and Health. The grant was for what was termed "tobacco control." From the years 1995 through 1997 --- while NOW maintained its strange silence on Bill Clinton and on occasion actually issued a direct rebuke to Paula Jones --- California NOW received a total of $543,636.00 in taxpayer money from Clinton's government, specifically the Donna Shalala-headed Department of Health and Human Services.

For an organization that had absolutely no history of leadership in the health arena, the grant was, to say the least, out of the ordinary. On the other hand, if the California organization --- NOW's largest and most successful state satellite --- had had to file for bankruptcy, it would have sounded a death knell for National NOW , exposing the depths of its troubles --- financial and organizational.

But that's not all. In 1998, National NOW received a modest $40,727.00 from the same CDC office for the same "tobacco control" agenda. Remember, in 1998, as Clinton's impeachment hearing loomed, silence wasn't enough for the feminist establishment. It was in September of that year that the so-called feminist leaders, including Patricia Ireland, reacted to the Lewinsky charges with their we-love-Clinton-because-he's-so-good-to-us press conference. The following year, National NOW received a whopping $182, 736.00 for more "tobacco control." In all, National NOW received close to a quarter million dollars from the federal government during the Lewinsky scandal. Taken together California NOW and National NOW received over three quarters of a million dollars ($767, 099) during the Jones and Lewinsky scandals.

Is there hard evidence of a direct connection between the grants and NOW's bizarre reactions to the Clinton stories? No, but the acceptance of federal money for the first time coupled with behavior that is so different from the organization's reactions to sexual harassment in the past, gives, to say the least, the appearance of impropriety."
============================================================
And now, NOW endorses Hillary Clinton for President!
Make History With Hillary The Time is NOW
http://www.nowpacs.org/2008/hillary/index.html

This is a clear example of how feminism is not even remotely about equality; rather, it is about ensuring gender privileges and entitlements for people with vaginas.

VAWA has never been held accountable for denying DV services to men and boys; there are over 300 state- and federally-funded "women's commissions," and only ONE unfunded commission on men's issues in N.H.

There is a federally-funded Office on Women's Health ... obviously none for men.

The list goes on and on.....

I noted in the link above that California's NOW affiliate was bankrupt and got bailed out via some underhanded fed slush fund.

Makes you wonder just how close to actual EXTINCTION NOW would be, except for VAWA and disguised taxpayer subsidies.

Kim Gandy continues to claim 500,000 members for NOW .... the same number they have used for two decades.

NOW has done terribly in its efforts to recruit young women, so I guess all the aging harpies just keep sending in their dues, even after they're dead.

Makes you wonder how come NOW's rollcall has neither expanded, nor shrunk in supposed membership, eh?

Maybe because they're using feminist statistics?

I will no longer donate money to NOW. I'm also taking my Kim Gandy poster off my wall. I will also sell my NOW commemorative ceramic plate collection.

anthony

anthony...

Just keep your Barbie dolls in their sealed virgin boxes.

They are worth a fortune!

Rumor has it that a lesbian Barbie is scheduled for release just after Hillary's election.