Take these three articles and tell me what you think:
Tentative Deal on Economic Stimulus Plan - New York Times (today)
Make the Tax Cuts Work (yesterday)
How to Stop the Downturn (yesterday)
(The guys over at Lawyers, Guns & Money have a little post here, too, that I liked.)
From the first article we find out that a compromise has been reached to give ordinary folks like you and me a $300 check - a rebate, I guess. But to get that check, a couple of concessions had to be made (and this is where my confusion comes in):
A House aide close to the negotiations said that Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and the Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, reached an “agreement in principle” after Ms. Pelosi agreed not to include two proposals that had broad support among Congressional Democrats: an extension of unemployment benefits and a temporary increase in food stamps.
In the op-eds from yesterday it's pretty clear to the economists that aid to the lower- and middle-income strata would help out the most. (The Times has a nifty summary of why this could be here.) One of them even mentions how expanding unemployment could help. But while a $300 check is ok, how much of a financial bulwark is it against a scaled back food stamp program and no extension of unemployment benefits?
I mean, let's say you've spent the $300 - to pay rent, pay off a credit card bill, buy some groceries or buy some gas, whatever. Now what? You're still on insufficient food stamps or you're still unemployed and your benefits are about to run out (or you didn't qualify for it in the first place.)
Since I'm not a theory head when it comes to economics or business, what's the long view of this issue?
I mean, is a $300 rebate check really the best that can be done? (I'm assuming, too, that if one qualifies for a federal and state EITC, then one would receive those checks, too, so maybe we're talking about more than $300 for a family?)
And what did you do with the last rebate check in 2001?
Shit, I don't even remember getting one.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Blog for Choice: there's no right without access
Let's talk about a great big elephant in the room before folks start celebrating the decreased need for abortion: access. From the Chicago Tribune article:
Bill Beckman, director of the Illinois Right to Life Committee, said he sees the national decline in abortion numbers as a victory for anti-abortion efforts."A number of states over the last five or six years have enhanced their pro-life laws, such as requirements for informed consent and parental notice," said Beckman. "When those laws take effect, the rate of abortion drops. I think the data they're getting is reflecting that change."
What Beckman calls an 'enhancement', I call 'building a financial box around women to make sure they're forced to give birth.'
Clinics offering abortion services are in a decline all over the country; in fact, since 2000, 77 clinics have closed and only 29 have opened. For some women in urban areas - with private doctors and access to a wide range of family planning options - access might not be such a hardship (yes, I know there are other circumstances that could slow down access to abortion in urban areas, like cash, but let's just deal with this.)
But for women in rural areas, travel could mean driving up to 50 miles to get to the nearest abortion provider. To get there and back, that woman would most likely have to schedule time off work taken as a sick day (perhaps an unpaid sick day and perhaps more than one day, particularly if that state requires a nonsensical 'waiting' period), loss of wages, perhaps arrangement of childcare for her other children (which adds to that woman's economic burden), increased travel expenses (i.e., gas) and just the physically wearying fact that she is driving to another county or state for a doctor's appointment.
I don't know about you, but I get pissed off if I have to go outside of my area code to see my ob/gyn, much less another state. And what does it cost me? A walk down the street from my office for a few blocks or, at most, a $7 cab ride if I take a cab from my house.
It is an undue hardship for a woman in downstate Illinois, or another rural area, to take two days off work for her abortion. Roadblocks to access basically put a woman needing an abortion between the proverbial financial rock and hard place. It's neat how the anti-choice folks have cut off a woman's reproductive rights from other realities in her life, like the economic ones. For them what's important is the unborn child; nevermind that there is a material cost to a woman's life if she has a child her life can't support (for whatever reason that it can't.)
In this next election there are some things to think about, the most important of which will be deciding which candidate will be able to ensure women have access to full reproductive health services. A lot of my friends are comfortable that Roe v. Wade will stand, but can we rely on that? Speaking with a lawyer friend tonight, she said that Roe v. Wade is probably one vote short of being knocked over in our forseeable future. We can also probably anticipate 2-3 Supreme Court vacancies in the immediate future. Which Presidential candidate will have the best chance to appoint Supreme Court justices willing to uphold Roe v. Wade? Can we safely rely on a Huckabee, a Romney, an Edwards or an Obama to act in women's best interests? Or can we only rely on a Clinton?
And action on the SCOTUS isn't the only thing to worry about. At the state level, over the past decade, states have become more aggressive in introducing legislation to limit, if not outright ban, access to abortion; states like Kansas, Missouri, The Dakotas, Wyoming, Utah, Iowa, Colorado, Mississippi, Kentucky, West Virginia, South Carolina and Arkansas either already have, or are in the process of introducing, some of the most restrictive laws to affect a woman's right to control her own fertility. States aren't backing away from this fight; anti-choice grassroots lobbying has proven most effective at this level, while we scramble to keep a fricking clinic open in Aurora. (You can check out the states with the least access to abortion at the Abortion Acess Project website here.)
And what will happen in Illinois if our next governor is Republican? (Not so inconceivable, considering how Blago is alienating absolutely everyone these days.) Will the women of Illinois still enjoy access to birth control without the interference of pharmacists? Will we be able to rely on timely access of Plan B birth control? Will we be able to rely on the shrinking number of clinics that offer a wide range of reproductive health services to women? Or will we suddenly have to familiarize ourselves with the days of the underground Jane network, like back in the day? Will we find our family planning needs taking a back seat to a man's outdated, patriarchal ideas of female sexuality and autonomy? Will we suddenly find ourselves planning group trips to Canada or New York or California for a simple doctor's appointment?
The right to control our fertility does not exist if we do not have access to the services that allow us to control our fertility. Access isn't just for the women who have good medical benefits and live in a city and can rattle off where the nearest Planned Parenthood clinic is; it's for women who make barely minimum wage and live in places like Bloomington, Alton or Aurora and there's no one around to help them.
And that's what the issue of access means to me: helping women get over the situation they find themselves in, not making them stew in it for months or years because it justifies a stranger's religion. How does it help that woman to wait days to get done what she already decided? How does it help a woman when we make her empty her wallet to visit a doctor? How does it help a woman when you force her to give birth and take away her ability to control her own fertility?
I guess it doesn't.
Bill Beckman, director of the Illinois Right to Life Committee, said he sees the national decline in abortion numbers as a victory for anti-abortion efforts."A number of states over the last five or six years have enhanced their pro-life laws, such as requirements for informed consent and parental notice," said Beckman. "When those laws take effect, the rate of abortion drops. I think the data they're getting is reflecting that change."
What Beckman calls an 'enhancement', I call 'building a financial box around women to make sure they're forced to give birth.'
Clinics offering abortion services are in a decline all over the country; in fact, since 2000, 77 clinics have closed and only 29 have opened. For some women in urban areas - with private doctors and access to a wide range of family planning options - access might not be such a hardship (yes, I know there are other circumstances that could slow down access to abortion in urban areas, like cash, but let's just deal with this.)
But for women in rural areas, travel could mean driving up to 50 miles to get to the nearest abortion provider. To get there and back, that woman would most likely have to schedule time off work taken as a sick day (perhaps an unpaid sick day and perhaps more than one day, particularly if that state requires a nonsensical 'waiting' period), loss of wages, perhaps arrangement of childcare for her other children (which adds to that woman's economic burden), increased travel expenses (i.e., gas) and just the physically wearying fact that she is driving to another county or state for a doctor's appointment.
I don't know about you, but I get pissed off if I have to go outside of my area code to see my ob/gyn, much less another state. And what does it cost me? A walk down the street from my office for a few blocks or, at most, a $7 cab ride if I take a cab from my house.
It is an undue hardship for a woman in downstate Illinois, or another rural area, to take two days off work for her abortion. Roadblocks to access basically put a woman needing an abortion between the proverbial financial rock and hard place. It's neat how the anti-choice folks have cut off a woman's reproductive rights from other realities in her life, like the economic ones. For them what's important is the unborn child; nevermind that there is a material cost to a woman's life if she has a child her life can't support (for whatever reason that it can't.)
In this next election there are some things to think about, the most important of which will be deciding which candidate will be able to ensure women have access to full reproductive health services. A lot of my friends are comfortable that Roe v. Wade will stand, but can we rely on that? Speaking with a lawyer friend tonight, she said that Roe v. Wade is probably one vote short of being knocked over in our forseeable future. We can also probably anticipate 2-3 Supreme Court vacancies in the immediate future. Which Presidential candidate will have the best chance to appoint Supreme Court justices willing to uphold Roe v. Wade? Can we safely rely on a Huckabee, a Romney, an Edwards or an Obama to act in women's best interests? Or can we only rely on a Clinton?
And action on the SCOTUS isn't the only thing to worry about. At the state level, over the past decade, states have become more aggressive in introducing legislation to limit, if not outright ban, access to abortion; states like Kansas, Missouri, The Dakotas, Wyoming, Utah, Iowa, Colorado, Mississippi, Kentucky, West Virginia, South Carolina and Arkansas either already have, or are in the process of introducing, some of the most restrictive laws to affect a woman's right to control her own fertility. States aren't backing away from this fight; anti-choice grassroots lobbying has proven most effective at this level, while we scramble to keep a fricking clinic open in Aurora. (You can check out the states with the least access to abortion at the Abortion Acess Project website here.)
And what will happen in Illinois if our next governor is Republican? (Not so inconceivable, considering how Blago is alienating absolutely everyone these days.) Will the women of Illinois still enjoy access to birth control without the interference of pharmacists? Will we be able to rely on timely access of Plan B birth control? Will we be able to rely on the shrinking number of clinics that offer a wide range of reproductive health services to women? Or will we suddenly have to familiarize ourselves with the days of the underground Jane network, like back in the day? Will we find our family planning needs taking a back seat to a man's outdated, patriarchal ideas of female sexuality and autonomy? Will we suddenly find ourselves planning group trips to Canada or New York or California for a simple doctor's appointment?
The right to control our fertility does not exist if we do not have access to the services that allow us to control our fertility. Access isn't just for the women who have good medical benefits and live in a city and can rattle off where the nearest Planned Parenthood clinic is; it's for women who make barely minimum wage and live in places like Bloomington, Alton or Aurora and there's no one around to help them.
And that's what the issue of access means to me: helping women get over the situation they find themselves in, not making them stew in it for months or years because it justifies a stranger's religion. How does it help that woman to wait days to get done what she already decided? How does it help a woman when we make her empty her wallet to visit a doctor? How does it help a woman when you force her to give birth and take away her ability to control her own fertility?
I guess it doesn't.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
uh, totally bizarro
Ex-Lawmaker Charged in Terror Conspiracy
and he was a Republican!
how crazy is this??
there is a really good diary on Kos here (where, if you follow the links, pretty much fills in the blanks.)
and he was a Republican!
how crazy is this??
there is a really good diary on Kos here (where, if you follow the links, pretty much fills in the blanks.)
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
poverty in illinois
the ctba released a study on illinois' economy in december and here it is. (well, the executive summary, anyway.)
major findings:
these are the issues that should be burning underneath presidential candidates' feet, rather than hillary's 'shrillness' or obama's 'magical negritude.'
don't you think?
major findings:
job creation in the state lags behind other states
wages are declining
low wage jobs are replacing good ones
there are real differences in workforce populations, skills and experiences
(race is not unimportant here)
these are the issues that should be burning underneath presidential candidates' feet, rather than hillary's 'shrillness' or obama's 'magical negritude.'
don't you think?
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Baltimore Finds Subprime Crisis Snags Women - New York Times
well, this is going to put my condo-buying dreams on hold for a while.
i'm curious to find out how women home owners in chicago are faring; during the housing boom (which is still quietly booming) a lot of my single coworkers/friends bought homes on their own. the crisis that finds some of these women now is startling; the path to economic security has now become shaky.
well, this is going to put my condo-buying dreams on hold for a while.
i'm curious to find out how women home owners in chicago are faring; during the housing boom (which is still quietly booming) a lot of my single coworkers/friends bought homes on their own. the crisis that finds some of these women now is startling; the path to economic security has now become shaky.
Monday, January 14, 2008
ugh, dating again
so how are things on the 'dating' front?
well, there was a brief setback last week when i discovered that, horror of horrors, B- is now in a relationship. my horror and dismay was not from jealousy; there was no regret that things hadn't worked out between us. (though there is much evidence of my inconsistency here.) no, my dismay and shock came from an irrational sense of competition.
"how dare he, the most lonely and dysfunctional of men, have a relationship while i don't! at least i'm working on my issues, dammit." i'm not proud of my pettiness; i just acknowledge that it exists.
anyway, a friend reminded me of my many vows to leave B-'s eeyore-like specter behind and so, finally, i am. (it helps that i'm confident B-'s inherent lack of generosity will doom his relationship in a few months no matter how often he goes jogging.) as i leave the weirdo behind, i look to the future and what do i see?
i see more weirdos.
i'm on a black networking site and, lord help me, it's sort of depressing. it's almost as bad as those christian dating sites i tried years ago. my kingdom for a man who can spell and use punctuation correctly!
and i'm tired of telling black men no, i don't have kids. make of that what you will.
are the men i've met there weird because they their writing skills are a little lacking? no. most of them are weird because they live in the burbs and can't say anything that doesn't sound like a R&B cliche. i'd also give my left nipple for a decent bit of banter.
(there was this one guy who thought he was being funny when he said that he'd buy me dinner, drinks and give me a warm place to stay for folding his laundry. it took everything in me not to get snippy. enough women have been snippy to these guys, it seems but, lord, trying to communicate with these guys is drying up my very small well of patience!)
i'll keep looking, though. there's gotta be a black/brown equivalent to me out there, somewhere. right?
well, there was a brief setback last week when i discovered that, horror of horrors, B- is now in a relationship. my horror and dismay was not from jealousy; there was no regret that things hadn't worked out between us. (though there is much evidence of my inconsistency here.) no, my dismay and shock came from an irrational sense of competition.
"how dare he, the most lonely and dysfunctional of men, have a relationship while i don't! at least i'm working on my issues, dammit." i'm not proud of my pettiness; i just acknowledge that it exists.
anyway, a friend reminded me of my many vows to leave B-'s eeyore-like specter behind and so, finally, i am. (it helps that i'm confident B-'s inherent lack of generosity will doom his relationship in a few months no matter how often he goes jogging.) as i leave the weirdo behind, i look to the future and what do i see?
i see more weirdos.
i'm on a black networking site and, lord help me, it's sort of depressing. it's almost as bad as those christian dating sites i tried years ago. my kingdom for a man who can spell and use punctuation correctly!
and i'm tired of telling black men no, i don't have kids. make of that what you will.
are the men i've met there weird because they their writing skills are a little lacking? no. most of them are weird because they live in the burbs and can't say anything that doesn't sound like a R&B cliche. i'd also give my left nipple for a decent bit of banter.
(there was this one guy who thought he was being funny when he said that he'd buy me dinner, drinks and give me a warm place to stay for folding his laundry. it took everything in me not to get snippy. enough women have been snippy to these guys, it seems but, lord, trying to communicate with these guys is drying up my very small well of patience!)
i'll keep looking, though. there's gotta be a black/brown equivalent to me out there, somewhere. right?
Friday, January 11, 2008
Thursday, January 10, 2008
um, shuck & jive is NOT 'bob & weave'
Pandagon :: Andrew Cuomo on Obama: ‘You Can’t Shuck And Jive’ at a press conf :: January :: 2008
dude.
really?
that's like the time my white, liberal, lesbian dissertation chair said to me (while i was helping her carry some things for our seminar): "Ding, thanks so much, but I really can't have you be my step and fetchit."
oh, yes, she did! Step 'n Fetchit.
i suppose, nowadays, that would be synonymous with, um, ... what?
but, boy howdy, i sure am glad racism is dead, though.
dude.
really?
that's like the time my white, liberal, lesbian dissertation chair said to me (while i was helping her carry some things for our seminar): "Ding, thanks so much, but I really can't have you be my step and fetchit."
oh, yes, she did! Step 'n Fetchit.
i suppose, nowadays, that would be synonymous with, um, ... what?
but, boy howdy, i sure am glad racism is dead, though.
are you kidding me??
Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House? - New York Times
"There was a poignancy about the moment, seeing Hillary crack with exhaustion from decades of yearning to be the principal rather than the plus-one. But there was a whiff of Nixonian self-pity about her choking up. What was moving her so deeply was her recognition that the country was failing to grasp how much it needs her. In a weirdly narcissistic way, she was crying for us. But it was grimly typical of her that what finally made her break down was the prospect of losing."
really? was this really what was happening, or are MoDo's exegetics just a bit off? (or plain wacko?)
i swear pundits and columnists are all drinking the same jonestown kool-aid.
there isn't a single stereotype they aren't willing to trot out and 'discuss' while not really questioning the frakking thing in the first place.
everyone cries!
yes, even macho men with giant testicles cry! my dad was in a conflict with his congregation and he cried! he cried when our mother died, he cried when my sister got married, he cried when i came home for christmas last year!
i've seen men cry at corporate retreats, recalling their best golf outing with their fathers; i've seen male CEOs cry as they tell their employees how great it is to work for their crappy company; i've seen men from new jersey cry when they had to lay off a buddy in another office. and who hasn't fucking seen an athlete cry when they win some stupid championship?!
for cripes' sake, can we lay off the hillary crying thing already??
is it too much to ask our 'journalists' to stop being so g'dammed stupid? really? (oh, and don't think i wasn't paying attention when that war-mongering wanker, bill kristol, said that hillary was faking tears. geez. talk about someone in need of a good nose punch.)
"There was a poignancy about the moment, seeing Hillary crack with exhaustion from decades of yearning to be the principal rather than the plus-one. But there was a whiff of Nixonian self-pity about her choking up. What was moving her so deeply was her recognition that the country was failing to grasp how much it needs her. In a weirdly narcissistic way, she was crying for us. But it was grimly typical of her that what finally made her break down was the prospect of losing."
really? was this really what was happening, or are MoDo's exegetics just a bit off? (or plain wacko?)
i swear pundits and columnists are all drinking the same jonestown kool-aid.
there isn't a single stereotype they aren't willing to trot out and 'discuss' while not really questioning the frakking thing in the first place.
everyone cries!
yes, even macho men with giant testicles cry! my dad was in a conflict with his congregation and he cried! he cried when our mother died, he cried when my sister got married, he cried when i came home for christmas last year!
i've seen men cry at corporate retreats, recalling their best golf outing with their fathers; i've seen male CEOs cry as they tell their employees how great it is to work for their crappy company; i've seen men from new jersey cry when they had to lay off a buddy in another office. and who hasn't fucking seen an athlete cry when they win some stupid championship?!
for cripes' sake, can we lay off the hillary crying thing already??
is it too much to ask our 'journalists' to stop being so g'dammed stupid? really? (oh, and don't think i wasn't paying attention when that war-mongering wanker, bill kristol, said that hillary was faking tears. geez. talk about someone in need of a good nose punch.)
Thursday, January 03, 2008
election '08: iowa. wow.
incredible. obama wins the iowa caucus for the dems. who put him over the edge? women, young people and independents.
edwards (squee!) comes in second!
and (gulp) huck takes the GOP caucus lead. mccain got spanked; romney got schooled.
please, let this be the end of GOP hegemony.
edwards (squee!) comes in second!
and (gulp) huck takes the GOP caucus lead. mccain got spanked; romney got schooled.
please, let this be the end of GOP hegemony.
hm. if women ran the world...
there would be a different culture around rape. definitely.
at the end of this most excellent post Twisty asks what you do when your (or a friend's) rapist goes free.
well, this is what we tried: we tried to get that bastard fired from his job (which put him in proximity to women and enabled him to sexually assault my friend) and run out of his building. we got his home address, photo, license plate, email address, phone number and were about to launch an all-out guerilla attack on his rape-loving reputation when our friend backed down. i still get mad when i think of this man (who was a drunken dickhead) and if i ever see him in a bar with a girl i will tell her he's a rapist.
what i really wished we did: got a group of women, shoved him into a dark van, took him to a remote location and beat him repeatedly, leaving him to make his own way out of the forest preserve.
there are worse things than jail. and for rapists, i believe in making sure they get them.
Its another Blamer Brain Trust Alert at I Blame The Patriarchy
at the end of this most excellent post Twisty asks what you do when your (or a friend's) rapist goes free.
well, this is what we tried: we tried to get that bastard fired from his job (which put him in proximity to women and enabled him to sexually assault my friend) and run out of his building. we got his home address, photo, license plate, email address, phone number and were about to launch an all-out guerilla attack on his rape-loving reputation when our friend backed down. i still get mad when i think of this man (who was a drunken dickhead) and if i ever see him in a bar with a girl i will tell her he's a rapist.
what i really wished we did: got a group of women, shoved him into a dark van, took him to a remote location and beat him repeatedly, leaving him to make his own way out of the forest preserve.
there are worse things than jail. and for rapists, i believe in making sure they get them.
Its another Blamer Brain Trust Alert at I Blame The Patriarchy
election 08: huckish
while i have never eaten squirrel from a popcorn popper, i have eaten ramen from a coffee maker. (yay, grad school.)
anyway, this was the funniest political piece i read this morning. while poking a finger in the GOP's eye over class, it also says Huck ain't no threat to the moneyed establishment, much. (which says a lot about our country's entrenched capitalist ideologies.)
my favorite part:
"Huckabee revels in the class war. He’s Two-Buck Huck, and darn proud of it. He likes nothing better than playing the Hick from Hope. He and his wife lived in a trailer for a while, he points out. His son killed a dog one summer, “a mangy dog” at that, as Huckabee explained to the befuddled national press corps. He said he used to eat squirrels, cooking them up in his popcorn popper. Ewwwwhhh!
And what’s up with that Chuck Norris shadow, following him everywhere like a late-night rerun? To the establishment, Norris is a B-lister with a bad hair dye and a ’70s-era karate shtick. They prefer Bruce Willis – bald Republican action hero."
if the press corps actually watched tv, they'd know why pairing chuck norris with mike huckabee is brilliant. (and they'd know that norris came out on his own to endorse huckabee - and they'd know that the grassroots in the religious right read norris' blog and sent up a big Yay!) a plain talking, modest, anti-establishment texas ranger who could kick his feet up and hit you in the throat - and he had a black partner? he's the less mild-mannered alter ego of the 'garsh' huckabee. duhh. read the semiotics!
as for me, i'm done with the 'good ol' rube' routine.
hello! we've already had a fake rube in the white house for two terms; why go with a real one? it's not like it'd be an improvement!
why can't the american people vote for someone SMART?? jeebus! SMART!
Two-Buck Huck - Outposts - Op-Extra Columnist - Opinion - - New York Times Blog
Sunday, December 30, 2007
huck for president?
Shake, Rattle and Roil the Grand Ol’ Coalition - New York Times
The Enduring Strength of Huckabee - Andrew Sullivan
Holy Huck, Straight out of Flannery O'Connor - Oh, Dave
Meet the Press transcript, Dec 30, 2007 - MSNBC
do you want an ex-baptist preacher for president?
Huckabee has an interesting reply when Meet the Press' Tim Russert asks him about his pastor past:
MR. RUSSERT: But where does this leave non-Christians?
GOV. HUCKABEE: Oh, it leaves them right in the middle of America. I think the Judeo-Christian background of this country is one that respects people not only of faith, but it respects people who don't have faith. The, the key issue of real faith is that it never can be forced on someone. And never would I want to use the government institutions to impose mine or anybody else's faith or to restrict. I think the First Amendment, Tim, is explicitly clear. Government should be restricted, not faith, government. And government's restriction is on two fronts: one, it's not to prefer one faith over another; and the second, it's not to prohibit the practice of somebody's religion, period.
MR. RUSSERT: So you'd have no problem appointing atheists to your Cabinet?
GOV. HUCKABEE: No, I wouldn't have any problem at all appointing atheists. I probably had some working for me as governor. You know, I think you got to realize if people want--say, "Well, you were a pastor," but I was a governor 10 1/2 years. I have more executive experience running a government. I was actually in a government position longer than I was a pastor. And if people want to know how I would blend these issues, the best way to look at it is how I served as a governor. I didn't ever propose a bill that we would remove the capitol dome of Arkansas and replace it with a steeple. You know, we didn't do tent revivals on the grounds of the capitol. But my faith is important to me. I try to be more descriptive of it. I just don't want to run from it and act like it's not important. It drives my views on everything from the environment to poverty to disease to hunger. Issues, frankly, I think the Republicans need to take a greater leadership role in. And as a Republican, but as a Christian, I would want to make sure that we're speaking out on some of these issues that I think we've been lacking in as a party and as, as a nation. [emphasis mine]
my question is, where does the separation between political animal and person of faith begin? if, as Huckabee puts it, faith is an intrinsic part of him, how can he separate that faith from future political decisions, made for a pluralistic society? Huckabee says that his evangelical past leaves non-Christians in the middle of America; i think that's fairly astute. it leaves them surrounded by a government led by an evangelical Christian and a citizenry that believes in the literal truth of the Rapture for the most part. if you were a non-Christian wouldn't you feel a little heebie-jeebie?
the attacks on huckabee from his own party are interesting, too. the times article mentions folks like limbaugh calling Huckabee a fake Republican because of his populist stances on poverty and i have to admit that i always feel sort of good about whatever makes limbaugh get his drawers in a bunch. but then i remember this is a Republican candidate we're talking about. his likeability, speechifying and surprisingly holistic views on education and poverty aside, he's still the man who's the most dangerous to a woman's reproductive freedom. again, from Meet the Press:
MR. RUSSERT: And what would happen to doctors or women who participated in abortion?
GOV. HUCKABEE: It's always the, the point of trying to say, "Are you going to criminalize it?" That's not the issue.
MR. RUSSERT: Well, if it, if it's illegal, it would be.
GOV. HUCKABEE: It would be. And I think you don't punish the woman, first of all, because it's not about--I consider her a victim, not a, not a criminal. You would...
MR. RUSSERT: But you would punish the doctor.
GOV. HUCKABEE: I think if a doctor knowingly took the life of an unborn child for money, and that's why he was doing it, yeah, I think you would, you would find some way to sanction that doctor. I don't know that you'd put him in prison, but there's something to me untoward about a person who has committed himself to healing people and to making people alive who would take money to take an innocent life and to make that life dead. There's something that just doesn't ring true about the purpose of medical practice when the first rule of the Hippocratic Oath is "First, do no harm." Well, if you take the life and suction out the pieces of an unborn child for no reason than its inconvenience to the mother, I don't think you've lived up to your Hippocratic Oath of doing no harm. [emphasis mine]
like his fellow social conservatives who shudder at the thought of women controlling their own fertility, Huck stops short of saying that those women should be thrown in prison. instead, he displays his unconscious devaluing of women by calling us victims. we aren't agents in the decisions we make about our fertility, but objects at the mercy of inveigling doctors or 'inconvenience.' whether his ideas stem from his faith or just a good old lack of trust in women's autonomy, they don't bode well for women's issues; do i want this man as president, wielding the power to appoint supreme court judges?
not so much.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Monday, December 24, 2007
merry merry
Enough of the Hills and Woods, Can I Send Grandma an E-Card? - New York Times
merry christmas to all 7 of my readers!
instead of sleeping on an arrow mattress in my sister's tv room, i will be warmly ensconced in chicago's brutal, weird weather, drinking all sorts of sparkly things and hosting a sleepover for my friends and other holiday orphans. it's good to know that the ny times has recognized how nice it is to sometimes spend christmas on one's own.
i hope all of you have a wonderful holiday!
cheers,
ding
merry christmas to all 7 of my readers!
instead of sleeping on an arrow mattress in my sister's tv room, i will be warmly ensconced in chicago's brutal, weird weather, drinking all sorts of sparkly things and hosting a sleepover for my friends and other holiday orphans. it's good to know that the ny times has recognized how nice it is to sometimes spend christmas on one's own.
i hope all of you have a wonderful holiday!
cheers,
ding
Thursday, December 20, 2007
awesome!
apparently, i'm brainier on this blog than my other one, which only clocked in at 'high school.'
thanks, Orange!
Friday, December 14, 2007
WTF?!?
this is utterly unbelievable - except i believe it because haven't we heard (some version of) this story before?
if you haven't already received the MoveOn alert, here it is:
...
Jamie Leigh Jones was a 20-year-old woman working in Iraq for a subsidiary of Halliburton when she was drugged and brutally gang-raped by several co-workers.
The next day, Halliburton told her that if she left Iraq to get medical treatment, she could lose her job.1
Jamie's story gets even more horrific: For the last two years, she's been asking the US government to hold the perpetrators accountable. But the men who raped her may never be brought to justice because Halliburton and other contractors in Iraq aren't subject to US or Iraqi laws. They can't be tried for a crime in any court.2
This is one of the most disturbing stories we have come across in a while. We're calling on Congress to investigate Jamie's case, hold those involved accountable, and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law so this can't happen again. If hundreds of thousands of us speak out against this outrageous story, we can force Congress to take action.
Can you sign the petition? ... Clicking below will add your name.
http://pol.moveon.org/contractors_accountable/o.pl?id=11800-4019649-L9cSbn&t=3
After you sign, please forward this email to friends, family and colleagues—we all need to speak out together.
When you get an email from us, it doesn't usually include a graphic description of a brutal attack. But when we heard this story, we knew we had to do something about it.
Here's how Jamie described what happened after the attack:
I awoke the next morning in the barracks to find my naked body battered and bruised. I was still groggy from whatever had been put in my drink. I was bleeding... After getting to the clinic and having a rape kit performed...I was locked in a container with no food, no way to call my parents, and was placed under armed guard by Halliburton.3
Jamie's attackers aren't the only ones exploiting a legal loophole to get away with their violent crimes. Another female employee of Halliburton says she was raped by her co-workers in Iraq.4 Employees of Blackwater, another private contracting firm in Iraq, were accused of killing innocent Iraqi civilians, and that incident turned into an international scandal. Worst of all, they may never be punished.5
Private contractors in Iraq are making massive amounts of money, operating above the law and are accountable to no one. This has to stop.
Congress needs to act now to bring these contractors under the rule of law. If they don't, nothing will prevent a case like Jamie's from happening again. No man or woman working in Iraq should have to fear that they can be attacked without consequences.
Please sign on to the petition: "Congress must investigate the rape of Jamie Leigh Jones and others, hold those involved accountable, and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law." Clicking below adds your name:
http://pol.moveon.org/contractors_accountable/o.pl?id=11800-4019649-L9cSbn&t=4
Thanks for all you do,
–Nita, Wes, Karin, Marika, and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
Friday, December 14th, 2007
Sources:
1. "Halliburton hit in rape lawsuit," New York Daily News, December 11, 2007
2. "Victim: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR," ABC News, December 10, 2007
3. Jamie's Journal, The Jamie Leigh Foundation
4. "Female ex-employees sue KBR, Halliburton—report," Reuters, June 29, 2007
5."Blackwater Probe Narrows Focus to Guards," Associated Press, December 8, 2007
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
if you haven't already received the MoveOn alert, here it is:
...
Jamie Leigh Jones was a 20-year-old woman working in Iraq for a subsidiary of Halliburton when she was drugged and brutally gang-raped by several co-workers.
The next day, Halliburton told her that if she left Iraq to get medical treatment, she could lose her job.1
Jamie's story gets even more horrific: For the last two years, she's been asking the US government to hold the perpetrators accountable. But the men who raped her may never be brought to justice because Halliburton and other contractors in Iraq aren't subject to US or Iraqi laws. They can't be tried for a crime in any court.2
This is one of the most disturbing stories we have come across in a while. We're calling on Congress to investigate Jamie's case, hold those involved accountable, and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law so this can't happen again. If hundreds of thousands of us speak out against this outrageous story, we can force Congress to take action.
Can you sign the petition? ... Clicking below will add your name.
http://pol.moveon.org/contractors_accountable/o.pl?id=11800-4019649-L9cSbn&t=3
After you sign, please forward this email to friends, family and colleagues—we all need to speak out together.
When you get an email from us, it doesn't usually include a graphic description of a brutal attack. But when we heard this story, we knew we had to do something about it.
Here's how Jamie described what happened after the attack:
I awoke the next morning in the barracks to find my naked body battered and bruised. I was still groggy from whatever had been put in my drink. I was bleeding... After getting to the clinic and having a rape kit performed...I was locked in a container with no food, no way to call my parents, and was placed under armed guard by Halliburton.3
Jamie's attackers aren't the only ones exploiting a legal loophole to get away with their violent crimes. Another female employee of Halliburton says she was raped by her co-workers in Iraq.4 Employees of Blackwater, another private contracting firm in Iraq, were accused of killing innocent Iraqi civilians, and that incident turned into an international scandal. Worst of all, they may never be punished.5
Private contractors in Iraq are making massive amounts of money, operating above the law and are accountable to no one. This has to stop.
Congress needs to act now to bring these contractors under the rule of law. If they don't, nothing will prevent a case like Jamie's from happening again. No man or woman working in Iraq should have to fear that they can be attacked without consequences.
Please sign on to the petition: "Congress must investigate the rape of Jamie Leigh Jones and others, hold those involved accountable, and bring US contractors under the jurisdiction of US law." Clicking below adds your name:
http://pol.moveon.org/contractors_accountable/o.pl?id=11800-4019649-L9cSbn&t=4
Thanks for all you do,
–Nita, Wes, Karin, Marika, and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
Friday, December 14th, 2007
Sources:
1. "Halliburton hit in rape lawsuit," New York Daily News, December 11, 2007
2. "Victim: Gang-Rape Cover-Up by U.S., Halliburton/KBR," ABC News, December 10, 2007
3. Jamie's Journal, The Jamie Leigh Foundation
4. "Female ex-employees sue KBR, Halliburton—report," Reuters, June 29, 2007
5."Blackwater Probe Narrows Focus to Guards," Associated Press, December 8, 2007
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
for the sake of honesty
why can't we, as a nation, just admit that we torture people?
it would make things so much easier.
no more linguistic acrobatics as pundits and analysts weigh the correctness of 'torture' vs. 'enhanced techniques.'
no more propaganda about revealing secrets to the 'enemy' during a closed door session of the Senate. (is the Senate the 'enemy'?)
it would be such a relief to have our cowboy of a president throw a press conference and say, "Look, y'all. We torture. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but we do it anyway. We strap down these young fellers and do things to them that Michael Vick just got sent to prison for doing. But it's ok, because we're America and we think that's what we need to do. You don't like it? Well, too bad."
if we admitted we tortured people we could finally relieve ourselves of the burden of being Democracy's shining light. we could stand tall knowing we are the type of country that literally hurts other people. it's a dubious distinction but one that could make us either really macho tough or really psycho sick. it's like we're living in The Portrait of Dorian Gray, you know? as a nation, we do these horrible sickening things but the picture of ourselves is just as glowing, youthful and full of beauty as it was when we were sort of innocent of such things. but we're so used to looking at the picture of our youth we've forgotten that our nation's true face is warty, full of pus and ravaged by our ... what? our sin? our immorality? our forgetfulness that we aren't supposed to be like some dirty ignorant totalitarian country with a secret police force putting the screws to people?
it would make things so much easier.
no more linguistic acrobatics as pundits and analysts weigh the correctness of 'torture' vs. 'enhanced techniques.'
no more propaganda about revealing secrets to the 'enemy' during a closed door session of the Senate. (is the Senate the 'enemy'?)
it would be such a relief to have our cowboy of a president throw a press conference and say, "Look, y'all. We torture. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but we do it anyway. We strap down these young fellers and do things to them that Michael Vick just got sent to prison for doing. But it's ok, because we're America and we think that's what we need to do. You don't like it? Well, too bad."
if we admitted we tortured people we could finally relieve ourselves of the burden of being Democracy's shining light. we could stand tall knowing we are the type of country that literally hurts other people. it's a dubious distinction but one that could make us either really macho tough or really psycho sick. it's like we're living in The Portrait of Dorian Gray, you know? as a nation, we do these horrible sickening things but the picture of ourselves is just as glowing, youthful and full of beauty as it was when we were sort of innocent of such things. but we're so used to looking at the picture of our youth we've forgotten that our nation's true face is warty, full of pus and ravaged by our ... what? our sin? our immorality? our forgetfulness that we aren't supposed to be like some dirty ignorant totalitarian country with a secret police force putting the screws to people?
and if we admitted that we torture people then we, the people, would have an opportunity to ask ourselves if this is really what we want to be and we, the people, could finally begin to demand some change instead of watching the Torture Word Choice Wars like it was some frickin' tennis match.
abu ghraib almost made us look at our true face but it was too easy to blame that ugliness on some poor trashy enlisted men and women. this could be our next opportunity to come to grips with who we are as a country.
abu ghraib almost made us look at our true face but it was too easy to blame that ugliness on some poor trashy enlisted men and women. this could be our next opportunity to come to grips with who we are as a country.
how much you wanna bet we're going to find another excuse to ignore our nature again?
Questions Linger After Hayden Testimony
Questions Linger After Hayden Testimony
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
My Sorority Pledge? I Swore Off Sisterhood - New York Times
i'm back in the saddle, sort of.
but this mornng, came across a very good Modern Love column about the damage some women do to one another.
i belong to a small, yet tight circle of women friends in chicago, and these women are as close to me as my own family. for the past month, i've enjoyed these friends of mine as they've brought me books, music, Dr. Who, cookies, magazines and gossip while i've been laid up recovering. we all live different types of lives (one of us just got engaged and one of us would rather poke her eyes out than get married) but we don't judge one another. we certainly don't attack another woman when she's been treated the way the author was treated in this article.
anyway, it only confirmed why i hated sororities when i was at ucla.
and made me glad i have the friends that i have.
i'm back in the saddle, sort of.
but this mornng, came across a very good Modern Love column about the damage some women do to one another.
i remember writing about how harsh we women seem to be with one another and i've honestly tried to interrogate myself whenever i find myself dismissing a woman because she doesn't fit the mold i have in my head of what makes a woman worthwhile. stay at home mothers, pregnant teenagers, bitchy bosses (ok, they deserve my disdain) - i've tried to ease up a little. but i don't think i've ever emotionally crippled someone. i don't think my friends have, either.
i belong to a small, yet tight circle of women friends in chicago, and these women are as close to me as my own family. for the past month, i've enjoyed these friends of mine as they've brought me books, music, Dr. Who, cookies, magazines and gossip while i've been laid up recovering. we all live different types of lives (one of us just got engaged and one of us would rather poke her eyes out than get married) but we don't judge one another. we certainly don't attack another woman when she's been treated the way the author was treated in this article.
anyway, it only confirmed why i hated sororities when i was at ucla.
and made me glad i have the friends that i have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
