Category: Politics

Blog for Choice

It’s that day again.

As it turns out, “abortion foes have high hopes for new Congress.” And their hopes do not stop with overturning Roe V. Wade.

If the So-Called Pro-Life movement gave a darn about life, they would not have accosted this man and his wife, who were arguably having the worst day of their lives already.

If the So-Called Pro-Life movement gave a darn about life, they would already have tossed out the minority among them that think it is acceptable to enforce their opinion with terrorism: vandalism, violence, and murder in the name of politics.

If the So-Called Pro-Life movement gave a darn about life, they would embrace reforms that benefit children, such as universal health coverage for minors, and programs that would promote family stability (such as, oh I don’t know, jobs??) for born-already-Americans.

If the So-Called Pro-Life movement wanted to reduce the number of abortions — and even somebody like me has to think there are places and populations where it might be to high — they would take steps to ensure that unwanted pregnancies and birth defects are prevented. They would try to prevent sexual assaults in their community. They would support widely available birth control. They would want to improve the environment. They would want to make healthy food more available than junk food.

The truth is that the “It’s A Baby!” crowd is anti-sex, anti-woman, anti-free-will.

In Closing: standards; mindfulness; multi-layered WTF; and where will they find the money?; ok we agree; Howard!; maybe, maybe not; lies revisited; scanners.

How is this not Terrorism?

Mere minutes ago, I read about the shooting and death of third term Congresswoman, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords at a Tucson grocery store. She was trying to meet with voters; her last tweet invited people to come see and talk to her. She was a Democrat who supported health insurance reform and voted for last term’s bill. She won her last election by a narrow margin, and is the only member of Congress married to an active military officer (he was also an astronaut). Recently, her office was vandalized; she and several members of Congress have received threats over the health insurance reform bill that was passed last session.

Princeton University defines terrorism as “the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear.” Dictionary.com‘s first definition is “the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.”

This woman was shot at the grocery store. Why? Because she was a supporter of health insurance reform? Because she was a damn broad woman in a position of political authority?

I’m going to make this very clear: she was killed for political purposes, and that is terrorism. But you won’t see the assassin prosecuted for terrorism, just murder. And you won’t see any admission by the Powers That Be that non-brown or non-Muslims could possibly commit terrorism because then we would have to address what really causes terrorism. And you certainly won’t see full-body scanners going in at the grocery store or the mall, because then we would all understand what security theatre is all about.

Update: I had forgotten about this. Funny, I hear it’s been taken down from Sarah Palin’s site!

In Closing: public option would cut the deficit; on unemployment and employment (oof); ok, 41% seems high to me, maybe we should reduce unwanted pregnancies; and bats in blankets.

America Needs Jimmy Stewart

Yesterday, the Christian Science Monitor asked “If we can require driver’s ed for teens, then why not voter’s ed?” It’s a good question, but it unravels when you start to ask what would be taught in that class. If you try to educate would-be voters on any of the actual issues involved in the current polls, you’ll be accused instantly of having an agenda: talk about the truth on Social Security and you’ll be called a liberal, if not an outright socialist, for example.

This Christmas, we decided to go ahead and watch the classic movie, It’s a Wonderful Life. You probably know the story: George Bailey runs a small bank in a small town in an honest and community-responsible way, and continually butts heads with the owner of the big, regional bank. Mr. Potter — unlike modern bankers — never actually does anything illegal, but he sure does some things that aren’t entirely *ahem* Christian. Thanks to the help of a friendly Angel, George gets to see what a mess the world would be without him.

At some point it occurred to me that It’s a Wonderful Life probably ought to be required viewing for Americans. Now, granted some people in the FBI thought it was communist propaganda. They thought everything was communist propaganda. But who can watch Bedford Falls transform into Pottersville and think that they are totally alone in the world? Who can watch the mess that unregulated monopolies [accidentally] create without thinking there is some necessary reigning in of big business? Who can really say it’s a bad thing for people to look out for one another in times of need?

Then I thought a little deeper, and realized that to balance out this movie’s religious overtones you really need more Jimmy Stewart. First, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, another Frank Capra directed film, featuring a naive new Senator coming up against The Way Washington Works. Not only does this demonstrate unfortunate truths about politics, it shows a genuine filibuster, and the power of pressure from voters.

Finish out the film festival with a much later Jimmy Stewart film, Strategic Air Command — and I don’t just say that because I have a soft spot for Carswell AFB in Fort Worth. It’s another great movie with strong themes of service to country and family, showing us what our Armed Forces are supposed to be about (hint: it’s not about blowing up brown people on the other side of the globe).

There you have it: 6 hours of classic movie viewing that every American should see on an annual basis.

In Closing: the Cult of Rand; the Germans think we’re insane; scientists disagree, so let’s throw them out of the discussion; everything’s illegal; reconsidering triclosan; look what the TARP covered up (interesting picture, and interesting banner in the background); economics of contempt; on personal responsibility; on job creation and the economy (I hope this is right); great patent; come on, the guy’s got a Nobel Prize; and a laugh.

Facepalm

Or: Ha ha! Women Like Cupcakes!

The Christian Science Monitor is not the only news source that went with the headline “Obama targets women voters in Seattle trip with talk of jobs, cupcakes.” The title goes back to this paragraph:

The White House gathered a group of female business owners for the Seattle meeting to try and help Obama argue that his policies have benefited women. They included the owner of a metal products manufacturing firm, and the owner of a specialty cupcake bakery.

Goodness knows we couldn’t have gone on to say something about the non-stereotypical woman running a metal shop! Nope, we had to talk about cupcakes. Apparently Secret Service guys like them too. If I liked reinforcing stereotypes, I’d point out the similarity between cupcakes and donuts. After all, aren’t Secret Service guys a lot like cops? And cops love donuts, amiright?? Ha ha!

What a shame that small talk about pastries derailed the actual important point of the article:

[A new report available from the White House Domestic Council] notes that women are now over 50 percent of US college graduates, and close to a majority of the US work force. At his Seattle town hall, Obama made the argument that as women go, so goes the nation, jobwise.

“How well women do … will help determine how well our families are doing as a whole,” said Obama.

What a shame that this message — and the larger message that many of us need decent jobs in workplaces that do not hamper our ability to be part of our families — had to be buried under a pile of designer cupcakes.

In Closing: On the Yalie frat boyz (am I correct that we would already be talking about their expulsion if they were chanting “Lynch Them!” instead of high-spirited talk of rape? Please say I am);  right, putting parents in jail will really make them better parents; try stomping your foot when you want a large corporation to do things your way; I NEVER NOTICED; I didn’t even notice The Great Nevada Shake Out; roar; water on the moon (everything you learned in grade school is suspect); “legal” pot in California might save more on law enforcement than it generates in revenues (like that’s a bad thing); yes, insurers will have to spend at least 80% of premiums on health care instead of profits; 2017??; our local paper may have to actually deal with the concept of “Fair Use“; the accidental girls school; an excellent question; noooooooo!; end of the CD?; wanna buy a live crab?; and a comic:
Matt Bors

Out of the Clubhouse!

Attention! I have a very important announcement.

As a woman, a post-feminist, a human being, and the self-proclaimed ShortWoman, I hereby revoke the female credentials of both Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle. The charges are as follows:

  • Reinforcement of the very worst feminine stereotypes including flightiness and an inability to do math
  • Antics that would not be tolerated in a male political candidate of either party
  • Political views which are detrimental to all women, which if tested would almost surely be proven hypocritical
  • General Lunacy

In addition, Sharron Angle faces a charge of:

Christine O’Donnell faces two additional charges:

These things being true, I am kicking Mr. Angle and Mr. O’Donnell out of the female gender and request that they surrender all identification showing a female status immediately. I will gladly start the donation pool to send them to Thailand for surgery if needed. I expect that as men, their antics will no longer be considered “cute” and they will be seen for the stupid, opportunist people they are.

Good Riddance

Yesterday, Mayor Daley the Younger of Chicago — not to be confused with his father — announced that he would not seek a 7th term in office. Quicker than most people can eat a Chicago-style hot dog, speculation began that Rahm Emanuel would run for the position. This speculation is serious enough that even CNN is speculating about who might replace Mr. Emanuel as White House Chief of Staff.

My answer? Is James Baker available?

I kid of course. But the point remains that leaving the White House would be the best thing to happen for the Obama Administration, even if President Obama doesn’t know it. Mr. Emanuel is the biggest problem facing the Democratic Party today, alienating core constituencies by saying stuff like “F*** the UAW” and completely ignoring the grass-roots support that got his boss elected. He’s a symptom of a faux-populist White House that gives half-measures on everything and then wonders how come nobody is happy with the half-assed results.

Seriously. Run, Rahm, Run! Get your tuchus out of Washington and back to Chicago, where that kind of “Because I’m in charge and said so” politics actually works. It’s the best thing for everybody.

I wanted to embed this, but it’s disabled. Try this version instead:

In Closing: low Vitamin D levels linked to heart failure and schizophrenia; bike helmets; antibiotic beer; caught evolving; more people might vote if there were better candidates; instant karma; rich people sure are different; how to save Social Security; how to study; War is Over??; on Craigslist; infrastructure is not a boondoggle; dumbass; Ms.; tuition; we know the economy sucks!; and let Isaiah Mustafa do your voicemail message. On a horse.

Oh, and Happy New Year.

Hold Your Nose and Pick One

The Nevada race for Senate continues to be close. But this week the Las Vegas Review Journal — our paper of record, serving roughly 75% of the state’s population — did a different poll. They found that 2/3 of people who support Sharron Angle wish the Republican candidate were someone else, along with 8 in 10 undecided voters.

Senator Reid isn’t out of the doghouse either: “Some 49 percent said they would have preferred another Democrat nominee over Reid, including 28 percent from his party, 66 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of the undecided or those aligned with other candidates.”

CBS has picked up the story, pointing out:

Before Angle’s nomination, Republicans were salivating over the likelihood that Reid would fall in the midterm elections in what was expected to be a demoralizing, high-profile defeat for Democrats. But Angle’s controversial positions on a variety of issues gave the majority leader an opening to portray her as too extreme for Nevada voters. Her nomination, coupled with Reid’s relative unpopularity, appears to have forced many in the state to have to choose between a pair of candidates about whom they have little enthusiasm.

So there is a question that we have to ask ourselves when we look at poll results: how many of those people who say they support one candidate will really go into that polling booth and select the other one? Where do the 66% of Republicans who wish Reid wasn’t the candidate overlap with the 68% who wish Angle wasn’t the candidate, and will some of them secretly vote for Reid? Will Angle say something between here and November so crazy that not even most Republicans can stand by her? Can Reid do anything to win over those who aren’t happy with her? Will voter turnout programs target at the unemployed matter in a state with one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation?

All these questions and more will be answered by November 2, 2010.

In closing: stop the rape; American birthrate at a new low; the Department of No Shit Sherlock (where did Susie find these great people to cover her blog while she’s away??); fighting for freedom, free of freedom; what on earth was the woman who tried to smuggle a baby tiger in a suitcase full of stuffed tigers thinking?? (cute little guy); when it comes to the GDP revisions, don’t forget to look at the huge gap between imports and exports (latte, anybody? Shame we can’t seem to export those); someone did a study showing children are likely to be underinsured (remember, children have no employers); 5 years after Katrina; how huge families make ends meet; garden porn??; riiight, nothing to do with fear-mongering talking-heads; and two blasts from the past that are relevant again, on public schools and Social Security. School starts Monday in Vegas and many other places; drive carefully.

Oh Sharron.

I hate to waste a lot of space on a Senate race, but this is Harry Reid we are talking about. Since he is the Majority Leader of the Senate, and it is polite to say that our other Senator is “embattled,” this is a big deal.

Senator Reid’s opponent, Sharron Angle, has really been saying some interesting things.

I think the most mind-boggling thing she has said is that the “Reid agenda” violates the First Commandment (that’s Commandment, not Amendment):

And these programs that you mentioned — that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward — are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that’s really what’s happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We’re supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government. And you’ve just identified the real crux of the problem.

Now, for context, she did say this on a Christian radio show. Her comments were intended to reach a very particular audience: one that takes the Bible very literally. Ok, literally except for the keeping Kosher part that is outlined later in the book of Exodus. It would be interesting to know when she last fed the hungry, gave water to the thirsty, clothed the naked, invited in strangers, looked after the sick, or visited those in prison.

But somehow she seems to think — and since this was all said during the primaries, I am inclined to think it’s pretty close to what she does believe — that Social Security Insurance payments, Unemployment Insurance payments, and the like are causing the “half” of all Americans who “aren’t paying taxes” treat the Federal government as a god. Right. Because taxes don’t buy things like roads, which are enjoyed by the rich and the poor alike. And nobody ever pays [attention to the fact that they pay] for Social Security and Unemployment Insurance right out of their paychecks.

Nor is Sharron alone in this strange train of thought. Her communications director just the other day released a statement saying “Only the supreme arrogance of Senator Reid would believe that he has a divine right to rule over mere mortals by ramming through Obamacare, billions in reckless spending, and yes, buying cocaine for monkeys.”

Cocaine for monkeys?? What?? Can we please have a reference on that so we know what the heck he’s talking about?

Sharron also thinks that the Federal government should have no say in what any schools teach, private or public. Does that mean she wants to see an ending for abstinence only sex ed? Well, no. Then what does she mean? The the Feds can’t insist that schools teach reading, writing, and math, or any other set of critical must-know things that employers and communities expect high school graduates to know. Oh, and she thinks your preacher should be able to tell you who to vote for (despite the church’s tax exempt status and the First Amendment). Oh and one more thing, she thinks gays are icky. No, she didn’t really say icky, only that they don’t deserve the protections of law.

But let’s not forget her most recent embarrassing moment, a moment so bad a Fox News reporter laughed:

We needed to have the press be our friend…. We wanted them to ask the questions we want to answer so that they report the news the way we want it to be reported.

Sorry Sharron, Senate candidates don’t get to spin the news whatever way they want it. Ones who want to get elected answer the questions that voters want answered. Maybe Steve Wynn could convince reporters to only ask what he wants to answer, but you can’t.

No wonder Harry’s looking a lot better in the polls than he was mere weeks ago. I sure do hope my neighbors don’t actually elect her!

In closing: On Social Security and Medicare; Is the Fed using phony numbers (why would they switch to the real ones now?); Goldman says “Ok, we’ll follow the law” (how nice of them); Kagan‘s in; new efficiency standards will save you money while helping the environment (and hey, somebody’s gotta build this stuff); on wage cuts (really, only feasible if we have mortgage cuts, but hey); Uh, Mr. President? Employers are doing just fine shipping jobs overseas without your help! (whose side are you on??); a true comic; and a funny baseball card.

Senate Republicans Acting Like Toddlers

Or, Senate Decides its Just Fine to be a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of the Fortune 500 and Special Interests.

Seriously. The Senate voted 57 to 41 on largely party lines to defeat what Harry Reid called “a bill whose principles both parties once supported and that 9 in 10 Americans want us to pass,” despite the fact that none other than the Supreme Court encouraged Congress to clarify the law on required disclosure of political donations.

Color me disgusted. They are in effect saying “NO! I want candy for dinner and you can’t stop me!”

Now don’t get me wrong, I think the disclosure requirements shouldn’t have loopholes for the NRA or unions. Then again, I honestly think you should have to demonstrate that you can actually legally vote for a candidate to give them money! Still, this act was a lot better than nothing. And as for Senator Snowe’s criticism that it was written too fast? How quickly she forgets how fast the mammoth pile of legislation known as the PATRIOT Act was passed. Where were her objections to swift legislative answers to problems then? Oh yeah, buried under a blanket of largely unfounded fear that the terrorists were going to try to get us again any moment now.

Got a Republican Senator? Remember come November.

In Closing: Goldman shows us where the money went; next time somebody talks about how great it would be to gamble invest Social Security money in the stock market, remember these 10 stock market myths from, of all places, the Wall Street Journal; No, I do not want bacon in my martini!; Susie‘s right again; “The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction says the US Department of Defence is unable to account properly for 96% of the money.”; employees becoming as mercenary as their bosses (no wonder); housing consolidation; “Document Leak May Hurt Efforts to Build War Support” (no really? D’ya think??); open letter to Lindsay Lohan from the ACLU; Angle Update; health insurance and small business; and a pile of big yellow dinosaurs that won’t die.

Don’t Make This Hard

Just about everybody thinks that Elizabeth Warren would be the absolute best qualified and most knowledgeable person to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Everybody except Timmy Geithner and the big financial institutions that got us into our current mess and stand to be regulated by the bureau, of course. After all, she might do things that are better for the hundreds of millions of us who do business with financial institutions, instead of the institutions themselves.

So it boils down to this — and by this we will know where President Obama stands. Does he nominate the best person for the job and ask the Senate to confirm Elizabeth Warren? Or does he nominate some crony who will do whatever the banksters want? And is he brave enough to commit one way or the other before November 2?

In closing: Sharron Angle is at it again; bank profits are worse than they look, which may explain why we’ve had over 100 bank failures so far this year; a real public option could save the Feds $68,000,000,000 in the next 10 years (how can they rationalize not doing it?); insurers push plans that even further limit our choices (and may put an end to all but the biggest medical practices); just a few words about Social Security; if the economy is getting better, where are the jobs and why is the White House predicting no appreciable change in unemployment until 2012?; on education reform; on cocoa (and why is this legal?); “VitaminWater” is not healthy; roughly 1 in 5 Americans suffered a significant economic loss last year, part of rising economic insecurity; but investors demand revenue growth or else!; we’re cutting back on little things; rape is just fine with 92 House Republicans, as long as it’s not white women; the middle class is vanishing, and an oligarchy is in charge; and a little science fiction.